Appalled at what I just witnessed on TfW

trainophile · 7 Jul 2019

Youngish chap, probably about 17, ticket inspection and he’d got a handwritten note on GWR headed paper authorising travel today as his train from Bristol last night was delayed so he missed the last onward connection from Newport to Chester. Luckily he was able to return to Bristol as he has somewhere to stay there. He also had his ticket from yesterday on his phone, although not activated as he had already missed the connection so hadn’t needed to.

So this TfW guard informs him bluntly that GWR can’t permit travel on other operators trains, and he will have to either buy a new ticket or get off at Abergavenny.

Whereupon we all piped up in his defence, and the guard asked him to step off the train at Pontypool to continue the dialogue.

He eventually returned looking quite shaken and says apparently the police will be meeting him at Chester as he is under suspicion of travelling fraudulently.

Luckily his parents are meeting him too, and he is letting them know what’s going on.

He’s a clean, polite young man and has been treated appallingly in the views of all my surrounding travellers.

It wouldn’t have hurt to let him continue on his way without all the jobsworth nonsense.

I await being called out on my views, but if it happened to your son how would you feel about this?

RailUK Forums

itomx · 7 Jul 2019

Unless there was an agreement between GWR and the other trian operator, the guard was right. However, I think the guard definitely went way too hard on the kid and caused unnecessary distress.

If it was me, I'd allow the travel because it makes everyone's life easier but my question is why did he not use a GWR service in the morning?

30907 · 7 Jul 2019

Headed paper, signed, dated and stamped, so clearly official? Even if the traveller were not a minor, this seems poor at first sight

However, there is the little matter of the unactivated ticket to consider....

@itomx: he presumably used GW Bristol-Newport and changed to TfW, since they operate the Marches line.

najaB · 7 Jul 2019

trainophile said:
So this TfW guard informs him bluntly that GWR can’t permit travel on other operators trains, and he will have to either buy a new ticket or get off at Abergavenny.

Strictly speaking, the guard was correct. *

However, according to the NRCoT (28.2) places an obligation on any TOC who can get the passenger to their destination to do so if they would otherwise be stranded.

*Edit: That one TOC can't unilaterally authorise travel on another TOC's services, not in charging for a new ticket.

itomx · 7 Jul 2019

30907 said:
@itomx: he presumably used GW Bristol-Newport and changed to TfW, since they operate the Marches line.

Ah right, didn't know as I have no idea about those areas lol. Still, I think it would have just made sense to allow the travel, the passenger had a long night due to reasons out of his control.

Mag_seven · 7 Jul 2019

trainophile said:
he’d got a handwritten note on GWR headed paper authorising travel today as his train from Bristol last night was delayed so he missed the last onward connection from Newport to Chester.

I wonder why they (GWR) couldn't have just issued him with a new ticket last night or at Bristol TM (where I assume he got on) this morning?

father_jack · 7 Jul 2019

Not all is adding up there.... Last off Newport to Chester last night was 2126. Arrivals at Newport from Bristol TM were all on time, the last one listed was plus 3 (so invalid) connection.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...RI/2019/07/06/2054?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

VAR 2023 2039¼ Portsmouth Harbour 3 1F30 GW Cardiff Central 2025 2041
VAR 2045 2053 Manchester Piccadilly 3 1V65 XC Cardiff Central 2046 2056¼
VAR 2123 2129¼ Portsmouth Harbour 4 1F32 GW Cardiff Central 2126 2131¾

RTT doesn't quote very well, apologies.

Also remember yesterday was St Pauls carnival in Bristol yesterday, chaos every year believe me.

And if a "note" is given by a station or ticket office usually the retail control in the other TOC would be given a heads up.

father_jack · 7 Jul 2019

najaB said:
Strictly speaking, the guard was correct. *

However, according to the NRCoT (28.2) places an obligation on any TOC who can get the passenger to their destination to do so if they would otherwise be stranded.

*Edit: That one TOC can't unilaterally authorise travel on another TOC's services, not in charging for a new ticket.

Correct. It would have been road transport paid for by the delaying TOC from the closest point the passenger could get to to their destination, which in this case would have been Hereford, albeit with a two hour wait at Newport and I would have thought the TOC control would have taxied all the way from Newport rather than that. But see my earlier post.....

father_jack · 7 Jul 2019

Mag_seven said:
I wonder why they (GWR) couldn't have just issued him with a new ticket last night or at Bristol TM (where I assume he got on) this morning?

The accounting processes of ticket offices in any TOC would never cover issuing a "new" ticket. It would be uncontrollable from an auditing perspective. Communication between TOCs would be the only option.

robbeech · 7 Jul 2019

Common sense would say that if there was a note on headed paper with the guards details then something such as a UFN could have been issued and checked after the event internally within ‘the railway’ and cancelled should it be confirmed to be valid.

Of course, this is more effort than any party is going to accept and as such it’s possible here that ‘the railway’ has failed in their duty.

That said if the timings do not add up then maybe this isn’t the case.

district · 7 Jul 2019

father_jack said:
The accounting processes of ticket offices in any TOC would never cover issuing a "new" ticket. It would be uncontrollable from an auditing perspective. Communication between TOCs would be the only option.

There is an accounting sundry called “Customer care” which has been used for a wide variety of such purposes in the past, including issuing paper tickets when smartcards have stopped working & paying for taxis during extreme disruption in cash. If TOC wanted to they could use this sundry to “buy” a ticket for this purpose, but I think you’re right in that it is easier all round for proper communication between TOCs in allowing a passenger to be passed on another TOCs train.

Bensonby · 7 Jul 2019

Frankly, why are the police tipping out to what is essentially a ticketing irregularity. Surely the thing to do here would be to take the lad’s name and address and check out his story slow-time? If he was pulling a fast-one he can be prosecuted in due course.

221129 · 7 Jul 2019

itomx said:
Unless there was an agreement between GWR and the other trian operator, the guard was right. However, I think the guard definitely went way too hard on the kid and caused unnecessary distress.

If it was me, I'd allow the travel because it makes everyone's life easier but my question is why did he not use a GWR service in the morning?

I'm sorry but this post is completely and utterly incorrect.

Bletchleyite · 7 Jul 2019

Even if the guard is correct, if a member of staff has acted incorrectly the passenger should not lose out; this should be a matter for internal investigation and if applicable disciplinary action. Withdraw for investigation with a receipt allowing travel.

Hadders · 7 Jul 2019

On face value this sounds poor from the guard.

The guard should’ve allowed travel.

The guard should’ve taken a copy of the letter for follow up with GWR if necessary to check it’s authenticity and how such matters should be dealt with in future.

The guard should’ve taken a note of the passengers details so that if the GWR letter was found to be fake it could’ve been followed up with the passenger by TfW.

Everyone would be happy. No need for conflict, involving the police, other passengers, arguments etc.

RPI · 7 Jul 2019

In guessing that it was a GWR "Back on track" voucher which can be issued at the discretion of staff, some staff give them out like candy but they clearly state on them that travel can only be authorised on GWR services, they are slightly smaller than A5 with GWR heading on them.
Did you read what was actually on the paper?

RPI · 7 Jul 2019

Best course of action would be a UFN, if he was telling the truth then all would have been fine, if he was telling porkies then he'd have been stung

yorkie · 7 Jul 2019

It's not possible to reach a conclusion without the full information, but an overriding principle a passenger should not be charged if any train company has been at fault.

If the Guard thought that GWR had acted incorrectly then they did the wrong thing by asking the customer to pay again.

If the Guard thought that the customer was lying, and they were not acting in accordance with instructions issued by GWR then that's an entirely different matter and it should be investigated; again it's wrong to charge the customer if fraud is suspected.

I's difficult for me to envisage a situation in which it would be legitimate to ask a passenger to pay for a new ticket, given the limited information we have.

As for BTP being called over things like this, if there is a good reason to suspect fraud, then fair enough. But if not, it's totally wrong to do so. I've heard of instances of BTP being called to remove passengers from trains when the passengers held perfectly valid tickets that were in their posession, let alone something contentious like this.

TfW have a dire reputation when it comes to ticketing disputes. While it is difficult to give a view on this specific case, there have been plenty of other cases where TfW's customers have definitively been treated in a manner that is truly appalling.

trainophile · 7 Jul 2019

Just to follow up, I didn't actually read the piece of paper although I'm sure the lad would have let me if I'd asked, but I clearly saw the GWR logo, and quite a screed of very forward slanting writing including comments about "delay" and "allow travel" - I was facing him over a table and reading it upside down.

As for the possibility of him deliberately attempting to defraud the system, I would swear on my life that this was not the case. He seemed a genuinely honest young chap, smartly turned out and polite at all times, and was completely taken aback by the turn of events. 10/10 on the attitude test, he was at no time difficult or rude, just bewildered by what was happening to him.

When the guard said rather aggressively "you didn't even ask me before boarding the train" he replied that he didn't realise it was necessary as he thought the piece of paper in his hand was authorisation enough. Given his youth, he probably wouldn't have had a huge knowledge of the way the railway works, and how complicated things like this can be, when as far as he was concerned he was doing all the right things. What would be the point of him making it all up, and forging a document on headed paper that he would be unlikely to have access to?

I asked him if it would be okay if I posted about his experience on here to see what more knowledgeable people thought, and he said no problem. He may even be viewing as a guest. I just wish I had thought to tell him to take a photo of the piece of paper in case he has to hand it over to someone.

I thought the same about getting "the police" (presumably BTP) out for such a minor matter, but thought they may have a base at Chester station so it wouldn't be too much of a big deal. I just hope if they turned up they were lenient with this young man. He was the sort I would be proud to have as my own son, and I feel sad that the railway caused him this distress.

father_jack · 7 Jul 2019

district said:
There is an accounting sundry called “Customer care” which has been used for a wide variety of such purposes in the past, including issuing paper tickets when smartcards have stopped working & paying for taxis during extreme disruption in cash. If TOC wanted to they could use this sundry to “buy” a ticket for this purpose, but I think you’re right in that it is easier all round for proper communication between TOCs in allowing a passenger to be passed on another TOCs train.

Yes, "outstanding incurred" or "item without debit" could in theory be used but one customer issue isn't a major enough instance to breach the cash regulations.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I remember an instance a few years ago where there was a major farce on a high profile Satuirday and tickets were getting non-issued no matter who the seller was !!!! It was an interesting meeting on the Monday morning but the retail accounts manager thankfully carrying out the investigation (instigated) was and still is a reasonable bloke who saw the reasoning behind the actions. Customer relations would still be working out the refunds now if we hadn't !!!

district · 7 Jul 2019

father_jack said:
Yes, "outstanding incurred" or "item without debit" could in theory be used but one customer issue isn't a major enough instance to breach the cash regulations.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I remember an instance a few years ago where there was a major farce on a high profile Satuirday and tickets were getting non-issued no matter who the seller was !!!! It was an interesting meeting on the Monday morning but the retail accounts manager thankfully carrying out the investigation (instigated) was and still is a reasonable bloke who saw the reasoning behind the actions. Customer relations would still be working out the refunds now if we hadn't !!!

Sounds like you did the right thing for the customer and I’m glad the accountancy manager used a bit of common sense. You’re right though without proper process though a sundry like that shouldn’t be used, but it’d be good that in say CSL2 disruption an on call manager could authorise the use of such a sundry.

I’ve dealt with disruption before in recent memory where we had to book a hotel for a passenger (which was dealt with through control and was authorised by the MD!) and allow the passenger to pass the next day. The travel involved our TOC and a long distance one, so a note was written and stamped with my contact details asking for the passenger to be passed the next day. I never got a phone call so assume the passenger got home safely. It would be have more reassuring for both of us though if we could have issued a new ticket with the next days date (although the ticket office was closed at the time of the disruption so maybe a moot point!).

6Gman · 7 Jul 2019

trainophile said:
Youngish chap, probably about 17, ticket inspection and he’d got a handwritten note on GWR headed paper authorising travel today as his train from Bristol last night was delayed so he missed the last onward connection from Newport to Chester. Luckily he was able to return to Bristol as he has somewhere to stay there. He also had his ticket from yesterday on his phone, although not activated as he had already missed the connection so hadn’t needed to.

So this TfW guard informs him bluntly that GWR can’t permit travel on other operators trains, and he will have to either buy a new ticket or get off at Abergavenny.

Whereupon we all piped up in his defence, and the guard asked him to step off the train at Pontypool to continue the dialogue.

He eventually returned looking quite shaken and says apparently the police will be meeting him at Chester as he is under suspicion of travelling fraudulently.

Luckily his parents are meeting him too, and he is letting them know what’s going on.

He’s a clean, polite young man and has been treated appallingly in the views of all my surrounding travellers.

It wouldn’t have hurt to let him continue on his way without all the jobsworth nonsense.

I await being called out on my views, but if it happened to your son how would you feel about this?

This reads slightly oddly. If his ticket was Bristol - Chester then wouldn't he have activated it before leaving Bristol? If he had separate Bristol-Newport and Newport-Bristol tickets then that may have made some sense, but ... would he?

6Gman · 7 Jul 2019

I'm also struggling to see - looking at Open Train Times - what combination of trains would lead to someone missing a connection at Newport on the 6th July.

Can anyone enlighten me?

(And, curiously, the latest Bristol-Chester service on a Saturday night appears to be via Birmingham - though I appreciate that may be more expensive.)

Sprinter153 · 7 Jul 2019

Previously I have used a zero fare excess, appropriately endorsed, to manage situations like this and logged it on the shift sheet as ‘customer care’.

The excess fare, as per the definition on iKB, has the effect of converting the customer’s fare to another fare and (in theory) prevents territorial TOC issues such as this occuring.

The accounting issue is for the railway to deal with and not the concern of the passenger, and I was always happy to justify anything as such to a manager. In fact it was never challenged.

Phil-D · 7 Jul 2019

Some of these ToC's are dreadful, I remember my stepson some years ago, he was about 14 at the time and had gone to Liverpool with a couple of his mates, you know how it is, when they first start spreading their wings. Well, he'd bought a return ticket at the local station, boarded the train and spent a few hours in Liverpool.
He got on the train at Lime street to come home, showing his ticket at the barrier, however, a guard got on at Edge Hill, and asked to see his ticket, which he couldn't find, so, the guard threw him off at the next station! He found his ticket when he got off, but they wouldn't let him on the next train, he was on his own in a strange place, and wasn't a particularly outgoing young lad, he wandered about outside the station until he found a local copper, who took him to the police station, rang us, and we had to go pick him up!
I was livid, if he hadn't met the copper, god knows what might have happened, some people lack common sense when dealing with a situation, and their attitude/behaviour, reflects badly on the company.
In the case mentioned by the OP, one has to wonder whether the guard would have handled it differently had the 'offender' been a big rough looking bloke, because I doubt he'd have thrown him off the train, some people are on a permenant power trip.

Bletchleyite · 7 Jul 2019

That story sounds slightly implausible. Who wouldn't let him on the next train? It seems unlikely that word would have been got to the following guard to tell them to refuse him with a valid ticket.

Phil-D · 7 Jul 2019

Bletchleyite said:
That story sounds slightly implausible. Who wouldn't let him on the next train? It seems unlikely that word would have been got to the following guard to tell them to refuse him with a valid ticket.

Apparently the guy on the station, said he'd been chucked off for not having a ticket, and he wasn't letting him back on!If it had been me, I'd have argued the toss with him, but I don't suppose a quiet 14 year old would fancy doing the same.

mmh · 7 Jul 2019

6Gman said:
I'm also struggling to see - looking at Open Train Times - what combination of trains would lead to someone missing a connection at Newport on the 6th July.

Can anyone enlighten me?

The already mentioned 2123 arrival which was late and arrived after the 2126 had left. It won't meet the minimum connection time, but there's already the hint that the passenger was possibly using multiple tickets from the mention of an unactivated ticket on their phone.

If the train from Bristol had been on time they'd have more than likely made the connection.

EastCoastway · 7 Jul 2019

Poor on the attitude but of course if the customer had the means to pay it and just went along with it surely GWR would, on presenting the ticket to GWR Customer Relations, give a GOGW Cheque/Vouchers for the additional ticket purchased. The situation could have been prevented had the customer or GWR employee (ideally) contacted their Customer Relations for a barcode or similar...

Thanksyou · 7 Jul 2019

Hello All!! I am the traveller in question. Isn't this exciting?!

I got home safetly without police intervention, which is a relief as I was very anxious. I would like to thank the kindness of @trainophile for her, frankly, emotional support whilst I was treated like a petty criminal. It was very unpleasnt but their kind supportive words were certainly a comfort.

I am not a fraud. I missed the connection because I believe my connection was in cardiff not newport. I was informed of my mistake this morning, but owing to the fact that the cardiff connection would have been perfectly fine if the train was on time i was given the note by GWR. The note, I was under the impression, was valid authorisation for my journey (except the issue with the Newport/cardiff mix up) was the ticket inspectors discression.

The confusion may be, that my ticket HAD been activated the day before when got the first train to cardiff (/newport). I had paid the fee for the journey, and the late train mixed with my mistake caused the missed connection.

Kind staff at Bristol Temple Meads gave me the note understanding the situation. If the ticket office had brought up the newport confusion things would have like been smooth.

Instead he was rude and insulting. He essentially called me a criminal, threatened me with staff members at Bristol's suspension and placed their supposed loss of pay on my consciousness, frequently spoke over me saying "i don't want amother word from you", called me very rude when I was nothing but polite, accused me of roping other passengers into it (they voluntarily defended me) and generally made me feel very threatened and frankly like a lower class of person.

There is one argument about whether the late train and my mistake demanded me to buy another ticket. But his conduct and professional demeanour were, frankly, shameful.

Oh well, I got home safe and sound!

Appalled at what I just witnessed on TfW

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Forum Staff

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

New Member