PBarnesHST
Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 22
What are the 3 fails?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Police called as commuter sits in empty first class zone on packed rush-hour train
- Thread starter Adlington
- Start date
- Status
What are the 3 fails?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
221129
Established Member
Fail to have a Valid ticket, Fail to buy a ticket, Fail to provide name and address.
Maybe other guards have allowed him to do that? Maybe he has a disability or medical condition? I don't know I'm only guessing. I'd rather hear both sides of the story before passing judgement.
Everyday is a school day! Thanks!
Not necessarily. The fact he didn’t have a valid ticket for First Class, and subsequently refused to pay/move out of that accommodation is sufficient.
Whilst I understand fully what is meant by "the attitude test" I have over my years of interested lurking seen it quoted many times but by and large I think it is pretty irrelevant.
I am fortunate enough (and I get that) that I can buy first class fares for almost all my travel and have observed over the years a huge number of people who think that they can smile sweetly and feign ignorance and that should entitle them to stay in first class at a significant discount to me.
I am not supporting those who fail the so called "attitude test" at all - just see it as a red herring.
I am fortunate enough (and I get that) that I can buy first class fares for almost all my travel and have observed over the years a huge number of people who think that they can smile sweetly and feign ignorance and that should entitle them to stay in first class at a significant discount to me.
I am not supporting those who fail the so called "attitude test" at all - just see it as a red herring.
Byelaw 19 is also relevant here and probably more appropriate as it forms basis in law for which BTP would attend such circumstances being a criminal matter...
“Byelaw 19 - Classes of accommodation, reserved seats and sleeping berths
Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in any seat, berth or any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is reserved for a specified ticket holder or holders of tickets of a specific class, except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place.”
Jonfun
Established Member
I'm generally against this train of thought. My personal view is that train staff shouldn't be immediately calling BTP if they can't get money out of someone unless they've also already attempted to go through the correct TOC procedures - ie collect details and complete a TIR. Too many staff in the industry see ringing BTP as a threat that might get the passenger to pay up when all that does is mean the BTP are tied up dealing with minor fare evasion (contributing to them not being able to attend more serious incidents) which if particulars of the passengers are obtained could be satisfactorily prosecuted by the train company.
I can see both sides of the issue and agree it’s not ideal. However, most BTP would only be in the office doing paperwork or watching TV, so I think it’s acceptable to expect them to help out with the odd difficult customer.
If a more serious incident came in, they’d attend that in the same way any police officer would. A BTP Officer would only ever reasonably attend issues such as this if they’re literally at that station anyway, otherwise there’s no point.
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,928
Previous experience matters not, it's what the guard decides on this occasion that matters. If the guard says no, you go. Any medical condition wouldn't really matter, even if he'd informed the guard that any easy access seats/wheelchair spaces were occupied and the guard had been unable to move whoever was in them for whatever reason this would STILL boil down to it being the guard's decision to allow them into first with a standard ticket. I'm pretty darnd certain he'd have brought anything like that up in his press interview though.
RailWonderer
Established Member
While I do think the guy is an opportunist, he offered to pay for a first upgrade, to which they told him to buy an entirely new ticket, which is unfair. Treating him like a criminal is not right, they should've just escorted him out at the next station as is more common on the continent. It's wasting police time to get involved in these matters, so no wonder they shrugged off the transport officers. No one wants to stand long distance and frankly, these 170s and 220s are frequently full and standing from what I hear.
If he was that 'mortified' why go public?
If he wants the first class upgrade then pay for it.
Yes, if he has done it many times before then why not buy a first class season ticket - which is the whole point of having first class!
Plus if you're thinking a train might crash as some sort of defence of breaking the law, then perhaps you'd be safer not on a train at all? Perhaps take your chances on a road instead.
londonboi198o5
On Moderation
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 449
A 20 minute commute is NOT long distance
Isn't this just another local rag story looking for something to wind up its readers on a slow news day? The reporting is laden with emotive words (at least to their target readership) and irrelevances to get a sympehtetic response, for instance:
what has the "The 26-year-old - who pays £142 for a monthly pass" got to do with the matter? Every other passenger would (or maybe should) have paid the correct amount for their travel. Under £4 for 15 miles anytime journey into the UK's second city is a reasonable fare anyway.
what has the "The 26-year-old - who pays £142 for a monthly pass" got to do with the matter? Every other passenger would (or maybe should) have paid the correct amount for their travel. Under £4 for 15 miles anytime journey into the UK's second city is a reasonable fare anyway.
Last edited:
But isn't that "only pay if challenged" territory?
Bevan Price
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 7,342
No sympathy for the man who was obviously in the wrong. However I would comment that it was a d**n silly idea to have 1st class on 2 or 3 coach 170s. A lot of trains were overcrowded even before they reduced standard class seating to make space for 1st class.
I had thought about that and it`s a possibility, given that disabled people are allowed to travel in first with a standard ticket if the TM allows it. As you point out there are always 2 sides.
Indeed.
Suggesting it as unfair seems to be a common line here though, whether it be on the wrong train, no railcard, off peak during peak etc etc. I really cannot fathom how these users cannot see the obvious, that if the only penalty when challenged is pay what you should have paid then there is no reason to buy the correct ticket in the first place.
I'm not aware of anyone being charged to stand in first class. I've been on HSTs where, following major service disruption, every square foot of standing space throughout the train has been occupied. Back in the days of units with compartments, standing in the corridor next to the first class was quite common in the peaks.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,294
I’ve seen people being charged by a FGW RPI for standing in first class between Paddington and Reading. No doubt being first off at Reading was part of why the passengers did it. I have also seen people being charged for walking through into FC on the way into Paddington so they can be first off.
Simple solution is get rid of first class on routes like this.
That sounds a bit harsh. Did the people refuse to move? Back in Valenta days I sometimes loitered in the front vestibule and never had any bother. I took great care not to stand on the pressure pad for the door so as not to irritate the seated passengers.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,426
Here’s an example of a thread from the disputes section where someone claimed he and two others were effectively forced by the crush to stand in first, and he’d received a notice of intended prosecution:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...f-intention-to-prosecute.172062/#post-3684355
No idea how it ended up, as the OP never came back. I’m sure there’ve been a few similar tales of woe...
Last edited:
adrock1976
Established Member
As it seems like the passenger had failed the attitude test, could the guard liaise with the driver for an additional call at Water Orton (assuming that particular train does not normally call there) and toss the passenger off there?
The options available to the passenger there would either be a lengthy wait for the next train, a 45 minute or so walk to Coleshill Parkway, a bus to Birmingham, or a taxi if it was time critical.
The options available to the passenger there would either be a lengthy wait for the next train, a 45 minute or so walk to Coleshill Parkway, a bus to Birmingham, or a taxi if it was time critical.
nanstallon
Member
- Joined
- 18 Dec 2015
- Messages
- 752
So British, and utterly pathetic. Why should police time be spent on pursuing a private company's claim against a passenger, sorry customer? And how much time of other travellers is wasted when trains are delayed for this kind of dispute?
Jonfun
Established Member
Most issues like this (hundreds each day) are dealt with by the private train company - BTP involvement in ticketing issues is comparatively rare and would usually only be the case if the railway could not establish the passenger's name and address with which to serve a summons.
I broadly agree that BTP shouldn't be used for routine fare dodging cases where the railway hasn't even attempted to deal with the matter itself first. The BTP aren't an infinite resource, in most cases they don't sit around in offices trying to avoid attending incidents, and they come at a significant cost, which ultimately is borne by the TOCs.
Llanigraham
On Moderation
I have a Disabled Adult Railcard and I have never been allowed or even offered to travel in First Class when the ticket has been inspected.
I don't believe that for one moment.
221129
Established Member
I do.
- Status