Gold card refused replacement

[David Dunning]

Then I suggest you crack on, and lets get this one sorted publicly.

There is however an old saying....Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

In this case FGW might say no future second replacements, end of, or increase the future fares to close down the loss of revenue.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Well Old Timer i normally enjoy reading your posts because its usually fact based and offers a different perspective , However you're tone with that comment shows you havent read what i said . Never a mistake i would make with your posts . I dont need to crack on .. not my patch, not of any interest to me personally. I was simply explaining to another poster why this would be of interest to the media and my credentials for holding that opinion .

And of course FGW might go the way of NXEC too . so everyone has to tred with caution

 

[EM2]

ok so if i need something looking after I can clearly depend on you .
So what are you bad at ?

I guess I have always had a problem with this kind of penalty system . It dates back to getting a detention for losing a school book . :roll:

It's nothing to do with being good at things or bad at things. exile said

I HAVE to keep it in a wallet, pocket, handbag or other place where it can easily be lost or stolen from.(my emphasis)

Yet both myself and jonmorris0844 have shown how simple it is to take a few precautions and NEVER (yet) lose it.

 

[Old Timer]

However you're tone with that comment shows you havent read what i said .. I dont need to crack on .. not my patch, not of any interest to me personally. I was simply explaining to another poster why this would be of interest to the media and my credentials for holding that opinion .

And of course FGW might go the way of NXEC too . so everyone has to tred with caution

This is what you said.

Well I have run newsrooms in cities across the UK from Cornwall to Yorkshire . and I have produced consumer programmes and currently work for newspapers too . So on that basis I say there is a very good chance this story would actually make it if it all added up.

With your connections and bearing in mind the size of the Industry you could not argue that you do not know someone in the area who would run it. If you are that concerned about the principle, and it applies nationally, then there is nothing to stop you running it anyway.

 

[exile]

Ye Gods :roll: :roll:

You have either not bothered to read the thread or you do not intend to accept what has been said.

I don't think I'm obliged to accept "what has been said" any more than you're obliged to accept my point of view - we are all entitled to our opinion.

Fraud - Wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain. I suggest you go to a Police station and report the situation as fraud and then get laughed out the door.

OK, I went too far there. But the fact remains the passenger is being asked to pay twice for the right to travel, and is down £4,000 - far more than if, for example, she'd travelled without a ticket.

Are you not able to undertsand that the OP agreed to the Ts&Cs when she bought the ticket ? FGW has already replaced one ticket for free.

What is under discussion is whether those terms are unfair.

The TOC has ben paid £4,000 for a season ticket which has been lost and could thus be used fraudulently. They are now expected to permit another £4,000 i.e. a potential £8,000 loss of revenue if either of these tickets are in circulation. If the TOC had a strong enough belief in a fraud being perpetuated then I can assure you the lady would be under formal investigation.

Yes, the TOC HAS BEEN PAID. The operative words. Given that the marginal cost of transporting a single person is more or less zero then the case for asking the passenger to pay twice for the right to travel is based on a loss of revenue based on the TOC themselves being unable to prevent a cancelled season ticket being used.

The simply fact is that the lady, and presumably yourself want to modify the Ts&Cs under which the tickets were issued. In no other customer field or travel industry would the level of expectation be so high.

In no other field can I think of a valued customer who pays £4,000 a year for a service (say, £160,000 over a working life) being treated in such a shabby fashion.

Cash can be used without any risk of the money being identified.

Not sure of the point here - the case being made is that a season ticket is "cash" - but no-one would carry £4,000 cash on them every day.

No TOC demands that people buy a season ticket, in fact it constitutes a loss of revenue due to the discounts. The TOC require all passengers to produce their ticket as proof of payment being made for the journey. The passenger buying a season ticket agrees to do so and is advised that it is their responsibility to manage the security of the ticket. Many ladies do this by connecting their season ticket holder to their bags.

The vast majority of travellers manage to keep their season ticket and not lose it. I managed to do so for many years.

Great stuff. But people DO lose things or have them stolen. Admittedly, the OP should have reported the loss or theft properly but it would have made no difference to the requirement of the TOC to issue a replacement a 2nd time.

What do you suggest is done - passengers walk up to the barrier and state on their honour that they have a season ticket ? A bit adolescent dont you think ?

No, I need to produce a season ticket. When have I said that I shouldn't have to?
All that's needed is that season ticket should be inspected properly by rail staff (if it's an annual ticket, this doesn't even need to happen every day) to check its validity and that it matches the photo card. That should take a couple of seconds. If there's no time to check the photo card, presumably there's no time to check it's otherwise valid, either.

Lastly, has the OFT accepted these terms are fair? I did google for this and could only come up with the Football case - have the terms actually been tested in court? I suspect that if my season ticket cost £4k and I lost it I might be thinking seriously about this!

 

[David Dunning]

This is what you said.
With your connections and bearing in mind the size of the Industry you could not argue that you do not know someone in the area who would run it. If you are that concerned about the principle, and it applies nationally, then there is nothing to stop you running it anyway.

well only the fact that the orginal poster seems to have disappeared lol

 

[blue sabre]

Well I have run newsrooms in cities across the UK from Cornwall to Yorkshire . and I have produced consumer programmes and currently work for newspapers too . So on that basis I say there is a very good chance this story would actually make it if it all added up.

So how come it hasn't been raised already? Surely this can't be a new scenario. There have been countless articles and reports about restrictions on advanced tickets (stopping short etc..) but none about the Terms of Season Tickets.

Try losing a mobile phone without insurance. No network will send you a replacement free of charge and you'll still be paying the contract. The only option you have is to buy a new one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes, the TOC HAS BEEN PAID. The operative words. Given that the marginal cost of transporting a single person is more or less zero then the case for asking the passenger to pay twice for the right to travel is based on a loss of revenue based on the TOC themselves being unable to prevent a cancelled season ticket being used.
!

The TOC has been paid to provide the OP with a season ticket, they did this. The OP then lost this twice within the space of twelve months -why should the TOC be responsible for replacing this, it isn't their error?

 

[exile]

So how come it hasn't been raised already? Surely this can't be a new scenario. There have been countless articles and reports about restrictions on advanced tickets (stopping short etc..) but none about the Terms of Season Tickets.

Try losing a mobile phone without insurance. No network will send you a replacement free of charge and you'll still be paying the contract. The only option you have is to buy a new one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The TOC has been paid to provide the OP with a season ticket, they did this. The OP then lost this twice within the space of twelve months -why should the TOC be responsible for replacing this, it isn't their error?

What is a season ticket? A piece of card? No. It's a right to travel. The OP has paid for this right. If the TOC is unable to cancel the ticket and photo card that it has issued (for an appropriate admin fee - say 10% of the value of the ticket) it's a poor show indeed and no excuse for dipping into the ticket holder's pocket to the tune of several thousands.

 

[David Dunning]

So how come it hasn't been raised already? Surely this can't be a new scenario. There have been countless articles and reports about restrictions on advanced tickets (stopping short etc..) but none about the Terms of Season Tickets.

Try losing a mobile phone without insurance. No network will send you a replacement free of charge and you'll still be paying the contract. The only option you have is to buy a new one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The TOC has been paid to provide the OP with a season ticket, they did this. The OP then lost this twice within the space of twelve months -why should the TOC be responsible for replacing this, it isn't their error?

I dont know why its not come up before to be honest . How many people lose two season tickets a year? . but I've done plenty of stories that havent been done before in my time so there's always a first timefor everything . it has cropped upon passenger forums before. And of course what a lot of people forget is that it may make it into a paper or news bulletin and the TOCs actions may seem reasonable after all . But right from the start I did say it May work not it will . I do feel for this poor woman tho .Losing 4k at the moment would finish me .

 

[blue sabre]

What is a season ticket? A piece of card? No. It's a right to travel. The OP has paid for this right. If the TOC is unable to cancel the ticket and photo card that it has issued (for an appropriate admin fee - say 10% of the value of the ticket) it's a poor show indeed and no excuse for dipping into the ticket holder's pocket to the tune of several thousands.

It's the right to travel when you are in possession of the ticket, and if the ticket holder is unable to keep their ticket safe then why should the TOC run the risk of loss of revenue.
You will come back and mention thorough ticket checks no doubt, even though it has been explained numerous times that technology isn't widespread on the railways nor is there the manpower and time to be able to do this.
For every person that falls foul of the T's&C's I'd wager a good bet that it prevents another 3 committing fraud.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I do feel for this poor woman tho .Losing 4k at the moment would finish me .

I don't disagree with you at all, hopefully she can get an amicable resolution out of this, but people need to accept that the terms are there for a reason and take a little bit of personal responsibility.
If the original theft had been reported then the OP would not find herself in this position, that's not me having a go I'm purely stating the facts of it all.

 

[snail]

What is a season ticket? A piece of card? No. It's a right to travel. The OP has paid for this right. If the TOC is unable to cancel the ticket and photo card that it has issued (for an appropriate admin fee - say 10% of the value of the ticket)

There is your problem. The more likely scenario is that ALL seasons would increase by a percentage to accommodate the potential loss of revenue from an increased number of claims. It's like every (honest) driver having to pay £35 to cover claims from drivers without insurance. All you end up doing is pricing season tickets out of existence.

A ticket is not simply a right to travel, it is PROOF of that right. Lose the ticket and you lose those rights because you have no proof. That has been enshrined in law for over a century.

 

[jon0844]

I guess I have always had a problem with this kind of penalty system . It dates back to getting a detention for losing a school book . :roll:

Given how little some people learn at school, being taught to look after something seems like a very valuable life lesson!

I bet that detention meant you tried harder to look after books from then on. Replace book with season ticket and there you go!

 

[Oswyntail]

....
A ticket is not simply a right to travel, it is PROOF of that right. Lose the ticket and you lose those rights because you have no proof. That has been enshrined in law for over a century.

But, in this case, the TOC still knows that the purchaser has that right. And, even if it is enshrined in law for over a century, that does not make it correct in the current technological situation. When the laws were drafted, it was very hard to confirm the holder was the purchaser; nowadays we have, eg, photocards.
At the root of this discussion is an apparent assumption, put across chiefly by those who (I assume) are in some way connected with the railways, that the default approach of the travelling public is to defraud the company (this has even been stated, I hope jokingly, on another thread). This itself is contrary to a basic principle of English law, presumed innocence. It is also untrue. But, with an approach like that, is it any wonder that railway companies are unpopular?

 

[exile]

Given how little some people learn at school, being taught to look after something seems like a very valuable life lesson!

I bet that detention meant you tried harder to look after books from then on. Replace book with season ticket and there you go!

People lose things. Civil servants have left secret documents on trains! It happens! Would anyone here like to be docked £4,000 for losing a work pass or other document? It's the scale of the "punishment" that's the issue here.

 

[David Dunning]

Given how little some people learn at school, being taught to look after something seems like a very valuable life lesson!

I bet that detention meant you tried harder to look after books from then on. Replace book with season ticket and there you go!

What do you think lol ?

People like me learn that when we first lose our car keys !

 

[exile]

There is your problem. The more likely scenario is that ALL seasons would increase by a percentage to accommodate the potential loss of revenue from an increased number of claims. It's like every (honest) driver having to pay £35 to cover claims from drivers without insurance. All you end up doing is pricing season tickets out of existence.

A ticket is not simply a right to travel, it is PROOF of that right. Lose the ticket and you lose those rights because you have no proof. That has been enshrined in law for over a century.

Nonsense. Of course I have proof. I've paid, I have a receipt for the payment, and the TOC knows that I bought the ticket. I'm not trying to travel without a ticket, which is another thing entirely. The law is indeed as you say but that doesn't mean it's fair.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But, in this case, the TOC still knows that the purchaser has that right. And, even if it is enshrined in law for over a century, that does not make it correct in the current technological situation. When the laws were drafted, it was very hard to confirm the holder was the purchaser; nowadays we have, eg, photocards.
At the root of this discussion is an apparent assumption, put across chiefly by those who (I assume) are in some way connected with the railways, that the default approach of the travelling public is to defraud the company (this has even been stated, I hope jokingly, on another thread). This itself is contrary to a basic principle of English law, presumed innocence. It is also untrue. But, with an approach like that, is it any wonder that railway companies are unpopular?

Well said! I'm still trying to get my head round the idea that £4,000 is a suitable penalty for losing a piece of cardboard.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

At the root of this discussion is an apparent assumption, put across chiefly by those who (I assume) are in some way connected with the railways, that the default approach of the travelling public is to defraud the company (this has even been stated, I hope jokingly, on another thread). This itself is contrary to a basic principle of English law, presumed innocence. It is also untrue. But, with an approach like that, is it any wonder that railway companies are unpopular?

My take on the commentary on here is not exactly the same as yours. I don't get the impression that TOCs assume that passengers are by default seeking to defraud the Company, rather a mix of closely connected views:-
a) passengers may avoid payment if payment is not requested;
b) many strategies for distinguishing an intention to avoid payment from an oversight, a misfortune or a lack of opportunity fail to make that distinction clear;
c) railway ticketing is an incomprehensible mystery to many who travel;
d) Railway personnel are operating under 120 year-old Laws which remain largely unnaffected by a wave of consumer reforms to most trading legislation (and which have received widespread publicity in the last few decades);
e) railway Operators are not wealthy enough to introduce personnel on all services and/or at all stations in adequate numbers to provide personal advice and support at all points, and would probably not consider that to be their responsibility unless it became a franchise requirement

To my mind, the most worrying of these is (b) as it often renders the unfortunate or forgetfull passenger indistiguishable from the determined fare evader. One of the historic inheritances under (d) is the unusual status of the Ticket, it is not quite a receipt, not quite a 'permit to travel' but more of a token representing quite a complex value and carring permissions which can vary over time and place and can be subject to conditions which themselves may change. No doubt the advances in electronic ticketing will seek to improve the situation, but are likely to bring another set of new challenges to be faced by front line staff and passengers.

Complex systems do raise complex problems.

Complex problems rarely have simple solutions.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I will indeed be willing to review a letter of appeal if Missburty attempts a first draft, and I will do my best to maximise her chances of a satisfactory outcome, though like many on here, I am uncertain that we could be successful. But in view of the value of the ticket involved it would be a shame not to make a committed and considered effort.

 

[sheff1]

People lose things. Civil servants have left secret documents on trains! It happens! Would anyone here like to be docked £4,000 for losing a work pass or other document? It's the scale of the "punishment" that's the issue here.

Of course it happens, thats life. The thing is that there is a difference between losing something and theft.

In this case, though, the theft of something worth £4k wasn't felt important enough by the OP to report to the police. So, why the concern following the loss of something worth the same amount.

 

[jon0844]

Yes, the failure to report the theft of the ticket to the police is a big issue.. and clearly arouses suspicion. Sorry, but without accusing the person here, there's very good reason to wonder why someone was not bothered about losing something worth £4k!

Why would someone not bother to report it? Now, I've not reported thefts to the police (like some cheap solar lamps outside the front of the house) because they were rubbish and I didn't want them back! That was some time ago.

Then I realised you must report things if only to ensure accurate crime stats, and potentially keep the police in employment. If everyone just comes to the conclusion that the police can't or won't do anything, we'll end up with no police!

 

[EM2]

Nonsense. Of course I have proof. I've paid, I have a receipt for the payment, and the TOC knows that I bought the ticket. I'm not trying to travel without a ticket, which is another thing entirely. The law is indeed as you say but that doesn't mean it's fair.

But what the TOC does NOT know is what you have done with the ticket. The onus is on the passenger to prove they have the necessary documents to entitle them to travel on the train, the same as the onus is on the motorist to have the necessary documents that mean they comply with the laws for the road (licence, MoT, insurance, VED) and the airline passenger to allow them to travel (passport).

 

[exile]

Clearly the OP made a mistake in not reporting the theft. An expensive mistake though. Most people think of a ticket as a receipt and thus having no intrinsic value though the legal status of a ticket is more complex.

As for insurance - look at this - http://www.firstgroup.com/ukbus/devon_cornwall/tickets/insurance/

Now no doubt I'll be told that as trains are effectively Victorian they can't possibly consider offering anything like this...... admitedly it's still a 2-strikes-and-you're-out but you can take out a policy on the 2nd replacement ticket for a new premium which seems fair enough.

 

[Missburty]

But what the TOC does NOT know is what you have done with the ticket. The onus is on the passenger to prove they have the necessary documents to entitle them to travel on the train, the same as the onus is on the motorist to have the necessary documents that mean they comply with the laws for the road (licence, MoT, insurance, VED) and the airline passenger to allow them to travel (passport).

Is there a 1 strike and your out rule with a driving license?
If i lost my passport more than once i don't think there is a a rule about how many times I can replace it...............

some other sites and their T&C's

ttp://www.statravel.co.uk/lost-ticket.htm
http://www.ticketmaster.co.uk/h/lost_stolen.html
http://www.wymetro.com/TicketsAndPasses/MetroCards/refundreplace
http://www.eastcoast.co.uk/travel-i...n-tickets/season-ticket-terms-and-conditions/

From FGW itself
What should I do if I lose my season ticket?
You can apply for a duplicate at the ticket office where the original ticket was issued.
(If it was bought over the Internet, you will need to contact Season Ticket Web Support). Visit the online season ticket pages.
If you subsequently lose your replacement ticket a further replacement is at the discretion
of First Great Western and may incur an administration fee.

Eurostar
22. If your ticket is lost, stolen or mislaid
The safekeeping of your ticket is your responsibility. If you lose or mislay a ticket (or a portion of a ticket) or a ticket (or portion) is stolen while it is in your possession we may issue a replacement ticket (or portion) on payment (except where the loss, theft or mislaying is the result of our negligence) of an administrative charge of £15.00. We will not make a refund for any such ticket (or portion), except where the loss, theft or mislaying is the result of our negligence.

BA
3d) Replacement tickets

If you ask, we will replace your ticket with a new ticket if:

you have lost your ticket or part of it
your ticket is spoiled, torn, damaged or has been altered or tampered with
you do not have your ticket with you and so cannot present it to us or
one or more unused flight coupons or the passenger coupon (or both) are missing from your ticket.
We will only do this if:

we or our authorised agents issued the original ticket
you sign an agreement to repay us any costs and losses, up to the value of the original ticket, which we or another airline would suffer as a result of the ticket being misused and
you prove that you had a valid ticket.
We will not claim from you any losses which result from our own negligence.
We may charge a reasonable administration fee for issuing a new ticket, unless the loss or damage was caused by us or our authorised agents.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have submitted my appeal to FGW and thank you all for your helpful (and sometimes not) advice.

Going through this process some things are abundantly clear

1) Whether legal or not the Conditions of Carriage rules are a) outdated b) not clear c) not made obvious to someone purchasing a ticket for the first time
2) I never knew that tickets should be considered as cash, maybe i was naive about this. Maybe FGW (and others) should offer their own insurance
3) For prime commuter routes please someone introduce SmartCards.

I do feel that regardless of the T&C's all passengers are criminalised without fair hearing under the current rules. Sorry - but those people who travel during peak are penalised enough with the highest fares. I (now) know the rules and do feel that it is quite frankly the WORST way to encourage people to use rail as a form of transport. We are not in the dark ages and would expect better from such an expensive service.

I will let you know how I get on.

Thanks all

Missburty

 

[exile]

"you sign an agreement to repay us any costs and losses, up to the value of the original ticket, which we or another airline would suffer as a result of the ticket being misused"

Now there's a common sense approach. But since TOCs don't check season tickets properly then there's no way they'd know your lost ticket had been misused.

 

[EM2]

Is there a 1 strike and your out rule with a driving license?

At this particular point, I am not talking about whether refusing a replacement is fair. I am pointing out that proof of once having paid for something is not the same as possessing it.
That's all.

 

[exile]

But what the TOC does NOT know is what you have done with the ticket.

They know I haven't made a claim for a refund - and that no-one else has either. If anyone does try it on they should be able to detect it.

The onus is on the passenger to prove they have the necessary documents to entitle them to travel on the train, the same as the onus is on the motorist to have the necessary documents that mean they comply with the laws for the road (licence, MoT, insurance, VED) and the airline passenger to allow them to travel (passport).

Yes, but this isn't a case of trying to board a train without a document, but getting a replacement document in order to board at a later date. I can indeed get replacements of these other documents for a fee related to the processing and admin costs, not to the value of the services the document entitles me to use.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

At this particular point, I am not talking about whether refusing a replacement is fair. I am pointing out that proof of once having paid for something is not the same as possessing it.
That's all.

But what the OP has paid for is not a piece of card, but the right to travel, with the ticket being evidence of this right which is to be shown to rail staff on demand. The issuing TOC knows very well that the ticket has been issued to the OP, and it's only because it can't prevent use of lost or stolen tickets due to the inadequacies of its systems that it won't normally issue a 2nd replacement.

 

[Old Timer]

But what the OP has paid for is not a piece of card, but the right to travel.

Which requires the passenger to provide the ticket thta has been issued. :roll:

 

[EM2]

They know I haven't made a claim for a refund - and that no-one else has either. If anyone does try it on they should be able to detect it.

The TOC are concerned that they are losing revenue by that ticket being used fraudulently, not that they have to cough up for a refund.

But what the OP has paid for is not a piece of card, but the right to travel.

Exactly, they can prove they have paid for that right to travel but do not possess that document that entitles them to that right to travel.
The customer must be able to produce that document, because as far as the TOC knows, it could be anywhere, including in someone else's pocket.
If you lost a £16 Off-Peak Day Return from RDG - PAD, would you expect to FGW to replace it, even if it was the second one?

 

[exile]

Which requires the passenger to provide the ticket thta has been issued. :roll:

For an ordinary ticket, one has to shrug one's shoulders and accept the loss of £5, £10, £50 or whatever, just as one would with a lost umbrella or mobile.

Here we're talking about having to keep in one's wallet or purse a small, badly printed piece of card (mine's now almost unreadable with 3 months to run) with a replacement cost the same as a small car. At least in Victorian times season tickets were substantial affairs reflecting their value!

 

[AlterEgo]

This is going nowhere is it?

Missburty, what stage are you at with regards to an appeal?

 

[bnm]

Sorry - but those people who travel during peak are penalised enough with the highest fares.

Nice try. Most people travelling regularly in the peaks are season ticket holders paying the least pro-rata for their journey when you make a direct comparison with walk-up fares valid for the same journey.

 

[exile]

At least season ticket holders do pay for their journeys! Whereas I know a number of pay-as-you-go "chancers" who get the occasional free journey should the conductor fail to check tickets.