Caught using spouse's season ticket

Great Western - my brother and wife opted that she drove the car back as she had taken a pt (she works for NHS) somewhere so my brother having paid via a joint credit for his wife's season ticket wrongly assumed that he could utilise it himself.

He was caught at the departure gate by an officious lady who was intent on confiscating the season ticket - regardless of proof that he was indeed the husband of the season ticket holder.

This now means that the wife is paying for travel whilst they have the season ticket in their possession.

He has been told to call the prosecution office during office hours but he isn't sure what he is being prosecuted for? Is it for using another person's season ticket - obviously it was paid for from their joint account but doesn't necessarily authorise him to use it! What sort of fine is he looking at please and what's the best way of recouping the fares that the season ticket holder will subsequently have to pay as the season ticket is confiscated?

I really appreciate any advice or experience you can offer please? He doesn't want to fight it as he accepts that he shouldn't have used it and it was naive of him to do so.

He is no fare evader, honest decent chap. The irony of these matters is that if the ticket is paid for then it's a shame it can't be something others could use if the ticketholder doesn't need it - if you buy a travelcard you can give it to someone else that day and they can use it without fear of being prosecuted or fined?!


Thank you.

loopsi said:

He was caught at the departure gate by an officious lady who was intent on confiscating the season ticket - regardless of proof that he was indeed the husband of the season ticket holder.

Click to expand...

Probably because, in terms of validity, it makes no difference if he was the husband or not.

loopsi said:

...if you buy a travelcard you can give it to someone else that day and they can use it...

Click to expand...

Not legitimately they can't. (However it is legitimate to loan a non-discounted Oyster PAYG card, to someone else, even if it has reached the daily cap).

The other account holders on the bank account is totally irrelevant

I don't think we can predict how First Great Western will want to pursue this, and one of the factors that they will consider will be what was said and recorded at the time. However, I'm sorry to have to say that the range of possible outcomes extends, from one extreme, from the possibility that the investigation will be concluded and the season ticket returned (probably not very likely), through to the other extreme, the possibility that your brother or your in-law will be prosecuted for the Criminal Offence of failing to produce a valid ticket with intent to avoid payment having unlawfully transferred the ticket to another person (more likely but far from inevitable).

I'm also sorry to say that analogies are not going to help you much at the moment (yes, I may buy a sandwich, a Bentley or a mobile phone, and give it to you; but no, I may not enter into a Contact for Life Insurance, professional training, education or Employment and give them to you) - anyway, there are many adequate examples in Law which are much closer to the actual circumstances you describe:
the classic case is Browning v Floyd [1946] KB 597 in which Arthur Floyd, the husband, actually had a valid ticket in his pocket, but instead presented his wife's return ticket, hoping to use his own on another later occasion (on Appeal, his Offence was found to have been captured by three Acts of Parliament and one Railway Byelaw, and Doris Floyd, his wife, was found guilty of aiding and abetting her husband in two of those offences and one Railway Byelaw in her own right).

A little before then, was the incident of Michael Keohane who passed a valid ticket to Lewis Greaver and was found Guilty in London Midland & Scottish Railway Co v Greaver [1937] 1 KB 367, or long before then, in Langdon v Howels (1879) in which he used another person's ticket; these cases have been the basis for securing prosecutions in hundreds of subsequent incidents of passengers transferring railway tickets - tickets which are clearly marked 'not transferable'.

And as for not having seen the small print, even poor Mrs Mary Thompson who couldn't read, and therefore didn't read the exclusion from liability on the ticket which her neice bought for her, wasn't able to argue that the company hadn't made the conditions clear - in Thompson v London Midland & Scottish Railway Co [1930].

In practice, if your brother and in-law have not incriminated themselves, and with some negotiation and some remorse, the Company may be willing to dispose of the matter out of court; but this should not be assumed - transferring of season tickets is a serious source of a significant revenue loss to Railway Companies, and where the evidence is available, prosecutions are an attractive resolution. Fines, Costs and Victim Charges in the order of £250 - £400 may be realistic, plus any legal costs you incur yourselves.

I'm sorry that this clearly isn't what you will have wanted to read. But I guess you need to know.

Thank you. Do you know what the prosecution office are likely to do about the issue please?

My season ticket has both a space for my name on the back, the photo card ID on the front and clearly states it is non transferable.

How could anyone think you could share it?

loopsi said:

He was caught at the departure gate by an officious lady

Click to expand...

Officious, or just doing her job?

loopsi said:

who was intent on confiscating the season ticket

Click to expand...

That is the correct procedure.

loopsi said:

regardless of proof that he was indeed the husband of the season ticket holder.

Click to expand...

Not relevant as others have pointed out.

loopsi said:

This now means that the wife is paying for travel whilst they have the season ticket in their possession.

Click to expand...

Yes, unfortunately she will have to for the duration that they have her season ticket.

loopsi said:

He has been told to call the prosecution office during office hours but he isn't sure what he is being prosecuted for? Is it for using another person's season ticket - obviously it was paid for from their joint account but doesn't necessarily authorise him to use it!

Click to expand...

A number of legislations can be used, such as the Railway Byelaws, the Regulation of Railways Act or even the Fraud Act, however until you receive any summons it is not always possible to tell which ones FGW will go ahead with.

loopsi said:

and what's the best way of recouping the fares that the season ticket holder will subsequently have to pay as the season ticket is confiscated?

Click to expand...

Not much you can do now, while the ticket remains under investigation.

loopsi said:

He is no fare evader, honest decent chap. The irony of these matters is that if the ticket is paid for then it's a shame it can't be something others could use if the ticketholder doesn't need it

Click to expand...

Impersonal season tickets do exist however AFAIK they can only be purchased for use by representatives of a company, not by individuals.

loopsi said:

if you buy a travelcard you can give it to someone else that day and they can use it without fear of being prosecuted or fined?!

Click to expand...

You can do it but you certainly are not allowed to. If caught then you can be quite easily prosecuted.

loopsi said:

Thank you. Do you know what the prosecution office are likely to do about the issue please?

Click to expand...

The first thing they will likely do is send your brother a letter asking for his version of events. This will be his opportunity to explain his side of the story and express the regret and remorse should he wish to do so.

BB21 has answered almost word for word what I was going to reply!
spot on IME.

I've lost count of the number of times someone doing their job correctly was/is accused of officiousness/jobsworthiness or simply 'being rude', IME (15 years) the vast majority of the time it simply means that they did their job correctly and the complainant was clutching at straws and throwing mud in the hope some of it might stick, unfairly of course.

I actually had once or twice someone telling me 'you can use your discretion' to which I generally replied 'I just have'
-discretion is NOT saying 'yes' or 'no' all the time, it's thinking about the situation and seeing if a reasonable argument can be found to make a more generous decision than hard & fast rules state.

The OP stated

"He was caught at the departure gate by an officious lady who was intent on confiscating the season ticket - regardless of proof that he was indeed the husband of the season ticket holder".

So if this is correct had not yet boarded a train.
So it's only attempted misuse not actual misuse.

And I agree the lady on the gate line was only doing her job

I think that once you attempt to pass through a gateline and present a ticket that clearly isn't yours I'd consider the offence committed.

Maybe the law doesn't, but I see it as different than, say, simply being 'caught' with it on your person outside of railway property or on the concourse (assuming there's any circumstance where this might be spotted).

Well, if the RoRA are to be used, then I think attempt to use the ticket fraudulently can be interpreted as intent.

Nozzacook said:

The OP stated

"He was caught at the departure gate by an officious lady who was intent on confiscating the season ticket - regardless of proof that he was indeed the husband of the season ticket holder".

So if this is correct had not yet boarded a train.
So it's only attempted misuse not actual misuse.

And I agree the lady on the gate line was only doing her job

Click to expand...

With relation to intent to avoid a fare, Section 5 RoRA says '..if any person travels or attempts to travel..'

timbo58 said:

I've lost count of the number of times someone doing their job correctly was/is accused of officiousness/jobsworthiness or simply 'being rude', IME (15 years) the vast majority of the time it simply means that they did their job correctly and the complainant was clutching at straws and throwing mud in the hope some of it might stick, unfairly of course.

Click to expand...

I think that accusations of "rudeness" are based on the assumption that the RPI will act like other members of railway staff that the person may have encountered - ticket office or gateline staff - who are generally friendly, helpful and focused on customer service. When they run into an RPI, who don't tend to worry so much about what the customer thinks of them, it comes as quite a shock.

Putting it simply, you're not being called "rude" in general; rather, you're rude in comparison to the other, more benign staff members.

The defenition of rudeness that I've heard from somebody who has the job of answering the complaints is "Did not give me the answer I wanted to hear"!

They had a good point. It's funny how the only people who accuse me of rudeness consistently have an invalid or no ticket, or are in First Class on a STD ticket and do not wish to upgrade. Lots of other passengers write in to compliment my helpfulness, knowledge and attitude. They can't both be right, who has the incentive to lie, I wonder?

We ended up with a farcical situation quite a few years ago on FGW when the RP department was 1st set up: the customer care department (Plymouth) were found to be informing complainants completely incorrectly about bylaws etc.
These were usually complainants they had been reported for prosecution mind!
Some were even sent apologies & rail vouchers!

A polite visit and a bit of a tete a tete between the customer care sections managers and the RP managers sorted this and all complaints regarding anyone who stated they'd been dealt with by a RPI were sent immediately to the RP manager before anyone from CC dealt with them.

Ironically I had 2 persons who were convicted in court for fare evasion who also had a letter of apology etc!

For those who don't believe that RP is a necessary evil: when Reading barriers were 1st 'costed' it was estimated it would take around 5 years to recoup the initial costings/recruitment/wages etc.
It took less than 6 months, that's how bad the fare evasion was.
Reading isn't the worst however, and the losses don't allow for the rise in 'very local' ticket sales etc.

I hope loopsi doesn't mind the conversation straying away from the original question, but I can't resist responding to the "rudeness" issue, from first hand experience - today!

Flamingo said:

The defenition of rudeness that I've heard from somebody who has the job of answering the complaints is "Did not give me the answer I wanted to hear"!

They had a good point. It's funny how the only people who accuse me of rudeness consistently have an invalid or no ticket, or are in First Class on a STD ticket and do not wish to upgrade. . . .

Click to expand...

I was going to work in Court today.
I travelled there and back on Advance tickets, which included an "and connections" element (nothing new there).
There were also disruptions and cancellations today (nothing new there).
I had introduced a delay en route which might challenge the interpretation of 'reasonable' to the "and connections" service (contentious and poorly defined).
I was travelling with some rail staff aquaintances who were on an off duty shopping trip (industry support can be supportive).
The tickets were booked weeks ago, and my memory of their booking requires the assitance that comes from the hard copy information printed on the ticket coupons.

Anyway, at a transfer point, after a delay, disruption, and cancellations, one service which was actually running on time was provided by Cross Country. So, I went over to ask the XC guard (standing on the platform who would be taking the train onwards, before the train arrived) if my "and connections" leg, with no reservation, would be acceptable on their train, - I was asking before the train had arrived in platform.

The conversation quickly became awkward. The Guard was adamant that an Advance ticket would have specific booked services for the "and connections", and bluntly said he wasn't convinced I was telling the truth. He certainly didn't believe that I didn't have reservation coupons for the "and connections" leg, and said he wanted to know what I'd done with them.
[they don't exist. Of course].

The guard DID let me travel.
He repeated his explanation of Advance ticket conditions, convinced that I didn't understand them, and that there would have been specific services which I would have committed to when buying the Advance ticket (and his xxx years as a guard was assurance that he was right).

Now I don't call that 'rude', but I can imagine that other passengers, with a different disposition to mine, and with less understanding of railway ticketing, might have found his approach to be very rude. Even I, renowned for calmness and reconcilliation, was disturbed by the suggestion that I hadn't been truthful, before even boarding the train. I had said nothing untrue, misleading or incomplete. I would happily have let the XC train go and taken another operator's service a few minutes later (though possibly not with 1st Class accomodation!).

So in this case, I agree, Flamingo, that I was acutely taken aback by something very close to rudeness from a guard today, and that the experience corresponded with 'something that I didn't want to hear'. But . . . who was right?
(I know that Guard was incorrect to assert that an Advance ticket with and "and connections" would have coupons printed with reservations and times for those "connections", and I may have pushed the time between the booked leg and the unreserved leg to the limits.)

(BTW We parted on very good terms)
--------------------------------

timbo58 said:

For those who don't believe that RP is a necessary evil: when Reading barriers were 1st 'costed' it was estimated it would take around 5 years to recoup the initial costings/recruitment/wages etc.
It took less than 6 months, that's how bad the fare evasion was.

Click to expand...

I have never doubted it. Though it does surprise me that the industry has so consistenly underestimated its losses.

Would it have been an idea to refer to the "issued as ## coupons" notation on the advance ticket to back up your point that there was no other coupon? (I presume the connection your reservation intended you to take would have been Northern, as had you been booked on CrossCountry you would indeed have been issued a reservation for that leg.)

Presumably the OPs brothers position may be made worse by the assumption that either partner could use the ticket.

If he had taken her ticket on the assumption it was valid she might be able to defend herself and get it returned. However the implication is that she gave it to him and was therefore complicit in its use.

loopsi said:

He is no fare evader, honest decent chap.

Click to expand...

Clearly not true.

loopsi said:

The irony of these matters is that if the ticket is paid for then it's a shame it can't be something others could use if the ticketholder doesn't need it .

Click to expand...

Irony or just the terms agreed to when buying the ticket?

loopsi said:

- if you buy a travelcard you can give it to someone else that day and they can use it without fear of being prosecuted or fined?!

Click to expand...

Certainly not true for London travelcards. In London only PAYG Oyster cards without a season ticket or railcard discount applied can be legally used by more than one person (although obviously not at the same time).

island said:

Would it have been an idea to refer to the "issued as ## coupons" notation on the advance ticket to back up your point that there was no other coupon? (I presume the connection your reservation intended you to take would have been Northern, as had you been booked on CrossCountry you would indeed have been issued a reservation for that leg.)

Click to expand...

Not just that, the reservation would say MANDATORY RESERVATION 1 OF 1. If this doesn't make it clear that the connecting service doesn't have a reservation then I despair...

maniacmartin said:

Not just that, the reservation would say MANDATORY RESERVATION 1 OF 1. If this doesn't make it clear that the connection doesn't have a connecting service doesn't have a reservation then I dispair...

Click to expand...

I really don't think that "MANDATORY RESERVATION 1 OF 1" would mean anything to the average rail passenger, who is already understandably bewildered by the ridiculously over-complicated process involved in catching a train in the UK.

Just how much further away from "go to station, buy a ticket, get on train" can we get?

Squaddie said:

I really don't think that "MANDATORY RESERVATION 1 OF 1" would mean anything to the average rail passenger

Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not, but it should mean something to a guard.

The ticket says "issued as x coupons" and the reservations say "mandatory reservation y of x". A train guard should be able to work it out from there.

DaveNewcastle said:

I hope loopsi doesn't mind the conversation straying away from the original question, but I can't resist responding to the "rudeness" issue, from first hand experience - today!I was going to work in Court today...

Click to expand...

Fair enough, Dave, I would never claim that all rail staff are models of decorum and understanding, with personal diplomatic skills worthy of the UN, and over the years I have witnessed some things that have made me cringe!

I'll still stand by my basic point, though. I have had a number of letters of complaint over the years, most of which at some point complain about my being rude or officious, but ALL of them have come from passengers who I either charged up, moved out, or issued a UFN to. In none of those cases did my employer come back to me to say that the passenger was in fact correct and I was wrong (indeed one manager used to berate me for being too lenient and excessing tickets when I should have charged a new ticket).

It is a stock element of any complaint, including the OP's here, who was not even present at the time!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Squaddie said:

Just how much further away from "go to station, buy a ticket, get on train" can we get?

Click to expand...

Any passenger can still do this, at any time. If there are no ticketing facilities available they can purchase their ticket on the train. It still is a "turn up and go" railway. However, they may have to pay an increased fare to avail of the flexibility this offers.

If they do not wish to pay a premium for this flexibility, then the passenger starts to have restrictions on their travel plans, I would say that it is up to them to make a reasonable effort to find out any restrictions they agree to when purchasing the ticket.

But that is getting away from the OP and his brother-in-law...

Some restrictions, rules, and limitations WRT railway ticketing are indeed unduly complex and should be simplified IMHO.

However in this case, no complexity is involved, season tickets are clearly marked "not transferable" And the O/P clearly used one belonging to someone else.

And as other post, one day travelcards SHOULD NOT be given to anyone else, they also are marked "not transferable" and use of one purchased for someone else is an offence.

(the offence of useing someone elses one day travelcard is not readily detected, but that does make it right ! Stealing from some shops is easy, but still wrong)

Personally I don't think using someone else's season ticket is wrong or "stealing" in any sense, any more than I'm "stealing" from Cross-Country when I split-ticket at Manchester to save money or I'm "stealing" from Tesco when I give Clubcard deals vouchers to my family who share my surname. The reason? Basically that I've paid for use of a facility which I don't happen to require at the time so someone else may as well make use of it in my stead, however railway ticketing law doesn't see it that way.

My wife and I also share a Stagecoach Megarider weekly bus ticket which is definitely NOT stealing whatsoever since the terms and conditions allow it, but using any ticket which requires a photocard (unless you're an identical twin!) is an obvious no-no not that it's morally wrong but even the densest checker can usually discern the difference especially if you're not even the same gender.

Long time ago I bought weekly season tickets from Blackburn to Bromley Cross which required neither a photocard nor a printed name so my wife used them for part-travel to Manchester shopping at the weekend but I don't think that's possible any more. Ah well. Sorry OP but they've got you.

Split ticketing is nothing like sharing a ticket.

So you are comparing something that is explicitly illegal to something that is legal? Good luck using that argument in court.

neilmc said:

Personally I don't think using someone else's season ticket is wrong or "stealing" in any sense, any more than . . . when I split-ticket . . . when I give Clubcard deals vouchers . . . .

Click to expand...

I wonder if you read the opening of my reply to the OP on this thread? I said "analogies are not going to help you much at the moment (yes, I may buy a sandwich, a Bentley or a mobile phone, and give it to you; but no, I may not enter into a Contact for Life Insurance, professional training, education or Employment and give them to you) - "

neilmc said:

The reason? Basically that I've paid for use of a facility which I don't happen to require at the time so someone else may as well make use of it in my stead

Click to expand...

The distinction which maybe should have been clearer is not whether you have paid for something, but whether a specific agreement with a specific person has been formed.
We shouldn't confuse consumer goods (which can be exchanged at will) with personal contracts (which are based on the specifics of the people concerned).

If we like extreme analogies then consider: if you pay for someone else's dental care do you expect their root canal work done on your teeth? I hoped that my examples of insurance, education and employment would have provided some helpful clarity.

Anyway, the prices of season tickets are based on factors which include the presumption that they are not freely exchanged between travellers as token for free travel.

neilmc said:

Personally I don't think using someone else's season ticket is wrong or "stealing" in any sense, any more than I'm "stealing" from Cross-Country when I split-ticket at Manchester to save money or I'm "stealing" from Tesco when I give Clubcard deals vouchers to my family who share my surname. The reason? Basically that I've paid for use of a facility which I don't happen to require at the time so someone else may as well make use of it in my stead, however railway ticketing law doesn't see it that way.

Click to expand...

Using your own illogic-
I can buy car insurance for me but when I dont need to use the car I can let me 20 year old son use it can I?

If I tax my car and am not going to be using it for a week or so can I put the tax disc on another car? I have paid to use a car on the roads so does it matter what car its on, after all it can only be on one car at a time which is what I agreed to!

The rules are quite clear when you sign up for it, if you dont like the rules then find an alternative you are happy with!

I did chuckle a bit when I read it, but expect rather a lot of people actually think like that. Then it isn't funny anymore!