Penalty Fares - Thousands of Passengers Overcharged

Hadders · 21 Aug 2019

RDG has admitted that up to 10,000 passengers given Penalty Fares have been overcharged because the amount charged was based on the full undiscounted fare rather than the appropriate fare. The regulations changed last year.

We've had a few threads on this and it is good to see the matter has now been clarified however it is quite disgraceful that such a fundamental change was able to be introduced without being properly briefed to all staff.

RDG have promised that the affected staff will be retrained but my view is that the Penalty Fares schemes at these operators should be suspended immediately until this has been done.

It all underlines the lack of knowledge and contempt for training shown by train companies when it comes to ticketing matters

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-08-21...gers-overcharged-for-not-having-valid-ticket/

Thousands of rail passengers overcharged for not having valid ticket

Eight train companies overcharged fare dodgersPhoto: Isabel Infantes/PA

Train companies have admitted overcharging thousands of passengers caught fare dodging.

Industry body the Rail Delivery Group (RDG) told the PA news agency that eight train companies punished ticketless travellers too harshly by not implementing a rule change made in April last year.

The new legislation reduced the correct punishment for some fare dodgers depending on the time of their journey.

But the RDG issued guidance to rail firms which failed to correctly set out the updated rules, resulting in them being ignored.

Up to 10,000 passengers could have been affected by the mistake, which was only discovered last month and led to tens of thousands of pounds being unfairly demanded by ticket inspectors.

The RDG said it has conducted an investigation and will ensure train staff are properly trained.

A passenger watchdog demanded that train operators must do “everything possible” to prevent a repeat of the error.

Around half of people affected will be issued refunds for the amount they were overcharged, but in many cases the train companies do not have fare dodgers’ full contact details.

Posters will be displayed at stations in the coming weeks to advise anyone who thinks they may be owed money to get in touch with the relevant operator.

The train companies which overcharged passengers are Chiltern Railways, Govia Thameslink Railway, Great Western Railway, Greater Anglia, Northern, Southeastern, South Western Railway and London Northwestern.

Around 1,500 Southeastern passengers were affected by an average of £8.

London Northwestern Railway estimates it overcharged 2,700 people by a total of £12,000 – which works out at £4.44 per person.

" data-on-all-screens="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding-right: 1.875em; padding-bottom: 20px; padding-left: 1.875em; margin-top: 1em; width: 740px; color: rgb(42, 42, 42); font-family: Reem, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
Sorry, this content isn't available on your device.

It’s important for train companies to take a firm but fair approach

Rail Delivery Group

Great Western Railway said it will post cheques to those passengers it has details for, with the average refund being £6.

An RDG spokesman said: “When people haven’t paid to travel, it’s important for train companies to take a firm but fair approach because fare dodging denies the railway around £200 million a year which could otherwise be invested to improve services for all passengers.

“People who have been charged a penalty fare shouldn’t be overcharged, though.

“We have investigated this issue and will ensure that staff have the right advice and people affected are reimbursed quickly and easily.”

David Sidebottom, director of watchdog Transport Focus, said: “Passengers will want urgent answers as to why this error occurred and assurances from the rail industry that it is being investigated and fixed immediately.

“Train companies need to do everything possible to demonstrate that they have a clear plan to get things back on track, provide train staff with the correct advice to avoid this happening again and make sure passengers aren’t out of pocket.

“Only then will people feel confident that they are being treated fairly.”

On routes where penalty fares apply, passengers must buy a ticket before boarding a train at stations where there is an open ticket office or a functioning ticket machine.

If a ticket inspector catches anyone who avoids doing this, they can issue them with a penalty fare notice.

These are also handed out to passengers unable to produce a railcard after buying a discounted ticket, travelling in first class with a standard ticket or staying on a train beyond the destination paid for.

Penalty fares are £20 or twice the appropriate single fare, whichever is higher.

The single fare was previously based on the price of a ticket valid at any time of day.

But since April last year the price of off-peak fares should be applied if the tickets were available for the journey taken.

RailUK Forums

JBuchananGB · 21 Aug 2019

Those passengers would have each paid much less if they had purchased a valid ticket before boarding. Where is the outrage at the “lack of training” for the passengers?

How is it the Railway is failing to get the message across that it is a legal requirement, where facilities are available, to buy a ticket before you get on a train?

Harpers Tate · 21 Aug 2019

JBuchananGB said:
....it is a legal requirement, where facilities are available, to buy a ticket before you get on a train?

Indeed. However, as with so many things, in reality (as opposed to theory) things are not black and white; they are shades of grey.

The truth is that, while the Railway can and does rely on various degrees of "penalty" for those who do not buy before boarding, it is often guilty of failing to offer adequate facilities to enable customers to discharge this responsibility reliably. We hear on this very forum of cases where inadequate facilities exist; a staffed ticket office, where the sole member of staff is either engaged with a lengthy transaction, or has taken a physical needs break; TVMs that are so badly located that they are all but inaccessible; and so on.

It seems to me that unless and until the Railway does make more than ample provision at any given location, it should be debarred from relying on this rule.

It also seems to me that in each and every case where the Railway has made a (genuine) error the victim should be compensated. After all, the reverse is true, is it not?

Hadders · 21 Aug 2019

We have a situation where EIGHT train companies have ignored the Penalty Fares Regulations. This is a serious matter and the Penalty Fares schemes operates by these TOCs should be suspended until the appropriate training has taken place. Without a suspension we could still have passengers being overcharged today.

This is yet another demonstration of why we cannot trust the train companies when it comes to fares. They say the right thing but time and again fail to walk the talk.

Bantamzen · 21 Aug 2019

Hadders said:
We have a situation where EIGHT train companies have ignored the Penalty Fares Regulations. This is a serious matter and the Penalty Fares schemes operates by these TOCs should be suspended until the appropriate training has taken place. Without a suspension we could still have passengers being overcharged today.

This is yet another demonstration of why we cannot trust the train companies when it comes to fares. They say the right thing but time and again fail to walk the talk.

Just to clarify this matter, we are talking about penalty fares that have been set too high (i.e. at 'Anytime' rates when an 'Off Peak' was the appropriate one), not that penalty fares should not have been applied, correct? If so then suspending them all will just signal a free-for-all for people wishing to travel without paying, not exactly the kind of behaviour you want to encourage when trying to apply correct application of revenue protection. A swift training refresher of all revenue staff would be far more appropriate.

yorkie · 21 Aug 2019

JBuchananGB said:
Those passengers would have each paid much less if they had purchased a valid ticket before boarding. Where is the outrage at the “lack of training” for the passengers?

All of them? Doubtful; I've become aware of numerous incorrectly issued penalty fares when valid tickets were held! I do really understand what your point is; are you saying it's OK for the train companies to break the rules because some passengers don't buy before boarding?

JBuchananGB said:
How is it the Railway is failing to get the message across that it is a legal requirement, where facilities are available, to buy a ticket before you get on a train?

There are loads of places where you are allowed or encouraged to do this.

Firstly most of the East Coast Mainline, there are numerous trains you have the right tobkard without any ticket, regardless of what facilities were available.

Secondly some train companies supply machines that are unreliable, difficult to use, breakdown part way through issuing tickets (which can cause the customer to waste hours of their time), and none of the machines accept all valid payment methods, with many not even accepting cash.

Thirdly train companies don't make all fares available through all channels.

Fourthly train companies may have a large selection of fares and it's not always clear which should be bought; done machines do not make it easy to select the appropriate fare.

Many penalty fares are issued to people who already have ticketsz but the ticket is deemed to be the wrong type of ticket. Sometimes it's correct that a PF should be issued, but sometimes it isn't. I have heard of many PFs being issues for inappropriate reasons; there are numerous examples on this forum if you go looking for them

What we need is more of the ScotRail Stratchlyde model where friendly helpful polite ticket inspectors keenly walk through the train selling tickets at every opportunity. I am not a fan of having no inspections most of the time and then overcharging and mistreating passengers on rare occasions when inspextions do take place by overzealousz badly trained staff who are looking for problems.

Several train companies are doing a lot of things wrong at the moment (from a fares & ticketing perspective) and it needs to get itself in order.

The PF schemes of certain companies should be suspended immediately.

yorkie · 21 Aug 2019

Bantamzen said:
Just to clarify this matter, we are talking about penalty fares that have been set too high (i.e. at 'Anytime' rates when an 'Off Peak' was the appropriate one), not that penalty fares should not have been applied, correct? If so then suspending them all will just signal a free-for-all for people wishing to travel without paying, not exactly the kind of behaviour you want to encourage when trying to apply correct application of revenue protection. A swift training refresher of all revenue staff would be far more appropriate.

Not only are they too high but there are numerous instances of them being incorrectly issued.

The train companies are getting away with braking the law, with no comeback for passengers.

We are talking huge sums in some cases! Some train companies are happy to prosecute people who underpay by small amounts and yet they think they can get away with overcharging people by much larger amounts.

It's not a level playing field. Change is needed to decriminalise railway ticketing matters. No other industry alienates, mistreats and bamboozles their customers to such an extent.

Bantamzen · 21 Aug 2019

yorkie said:
Not only are they too high but there are numerous instances of them being incorrectly issued.

The train companies are getting away with braking the law, with no comeback for passengers.

We are talking huge sums in some cases! Some train companies are happy to prosecute people who underpay by small amounts and yet they think they can get away with overcharging people by much larger amounts.

It's not a level playing field. Change is needed to decriminalise railway ticketing matters. No other industry alienates, mistreats and bamboozles their customers to such an extent.

Where they are incorrectly applied, be it by charging too high a PF or that it should not be applied at all, then that does need tackling. I'm not disputing this. All I am saying is that this can only be done through ensuring that revenue staff are properly trained, and that where examples arise where action should not have been taken the TOC and/or contractor be penalised appropriately. Simply suspending the system as suggested above will send entirely the wrong message out there.

However we do live in the real world, and we do have people that actively seek to avoid paying fares, and so we do need some form of deterrent. As we have a privatised system, we have either the choice of underwriting revenue loss through evasion through public funds, or ask the privatised companies to manage their own revenue protection. Personally I would rather the DfT / NR be directly responsible for ticket sales & revenue, and the operators simply be contracted to run the trains. This might sharpen minds in Whitehall to implement the infrastructure to maximise revenue protection, and provide a single accountable source when things go wrong. But that's for another thread.

Hadders · 21 Aug 2019

Bantamzen said:
Just to clarify this matter, we are talking about penalty fares that have been set too high (i.e. at 'Anytime' rates when an 'Off Peak' was the appropriate one), not that penalty fares should not have been applied, correct? If so then suspending them all will just signal a free-for-all for people wishing to travel without paying, not exactly the kind of behaviour you want to encourage when trying to apply correct application of revenue protection. A swift training refresher of all revenue staff would be far more appropriate.

The schemes should be suspended until the training is complete. That should at least crystallise the minds of the train companies.

Otherwise we’ll still probably be in the position of invalid PFs being issued this time next year...

yorkie · 21 Aug 2019

Bantamzen said:
Where they are incorrectly applied, be it by charging too high a PF or that it should not be applied at all, then that does need tackling. I'm not disputing this. All I am saying is that this can only be done through ensuring that revenue staff are properly trained...

This will never happen if past experience is anything to go by. Why will they suddenly start now?

Bantamzen said:
and that where examples arise where action should not have been taken the TOC and/or contractor be penalised appropriately.

This should happen but does not

Bantamzen said:
Simply suspending the system as suggested above will send entirely the wrong message out there.

This would send a message to the TOCs. It has happened before; why not again?

Bantamzen said:
However we do live in the real world, and we do have people that actively seek to avoid paying fares, and so we do need some form of deterrent. ...

Are Scotrail, LNER, Virgin etc not in the "real world"?

Bantamzen · 21 Aug 2019

yorkie said:
This will never happen if past experience is anything to go by. Why will they suddenly start now?

yorkie said:
This should happen but does not

Well it is ultimately the responsibility of the DfT to ensure it does. If they do not apply & enforce the required checks & measures, then Parliament needs to intervene.

yorkie said:
This would send a message to the TOCs. It has happened before; why not again?

Generally speaking where any private companies incur an unexpected cost, they will seek to either absorb it with internal efficiencies, or pass the cost on. Is it possible that this message would / has simply translated into seeking higher prices? Colour me cynical, but I suspect this is probably the case.

yorkie said:
Are Scotrail, LNER, Virgin etc not in the "real world"?

I'm sorry, I don't understand this response in the context of what I said? Do these companies have no form of fare evasion deterrent?

some bloke · 21 Aug 2019

Perhaps the announcement was due to discussion on this forum, and/or specifically because @ten7 approached several organisations.

Reading between the lines, civil servants may have meant "yes, RDG have got it wrong and we are concerned enough to tell them and the appeals body".

ten7 said:
DfT responded to this and said...the guidance published by RDG must be clear and leave no scope for confusion regarding any consistency with the regulations and that for any appeal, appeals body must make decisions based on the regulations.

Is it of more concern that the companies made the error, or that there was resistance to the correct position being pointed out?

some bloke · 21 Aug 2019

Daily Mail said:
Around half of people affected will be issued refunds for the amount they were overcharged

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...gers-overcharged-not-having-valid-ticket.html

Aren't they due the whole amount, as it wasn't in accordance with the regulations?

furlong · 21 Aug 2019

I think it is crystal clear that under the regulations as they stand, they must be refunded what they paid in full - in other words their journey was free. To avoid that I think they'd need to change the regulations retrospectively (which would be a legal mess). I think the problem goes back a lot further actually - I have long thought the old PF rules said the same thing and the DfT just rewrote them to make the point more clearly when they updated them.

It should be for all the TOCs to stop issuing Penalty Fares voluntarily for a (very) short period of time while their staff are retrained. And while they are at it, perhaps they'll take seriously the rest of their obligations under the regulations - fix the other problems - then do a relaunch. Now might be a good time to start a thread bringing together the various problems with the new regulations and the way PFs are used and suggesting what the DfT and the companies need to do to fix them, so we can have confidence that TOCs are only issuing Penalty Fares to people who were, a reasonable observer would agree, intending not to pay the correct fare.

I'd like to think this forum played its part in highlighting the terrible behaviour of the train companies and, in particular, the appeals panel, in misinterpreting this rule for such a long time. If the thread on here a while ago is to be believed, the appeals panel sadly seemed to have undermined its independence by siding with the train companies on this matter instead of interpreting the law as written.

furlong · 21 Aug 2019

So I would suggest an independent inquiry may need to be set up to review all the appeals decisions made and penalty fares issued - and it might need to go back to cover the period of the old regulations too - and look for and deal with other cases where the regulations were misinterpreted, and there now needs to be a fourth, more limited, level of appeal for cases where the final appeals panel might have misinterpreted the regulations.

furlong · 21 Aug 2019

An independent senior legal figure should be given overview of Penalty Fares.

some bloke · 21 Aug 2019

The regulations say you're not liable for the penalty fare if you win an appeal.

Strictly speaking, the position as a result of the company deciding to refund may not be so clear-cut.

But even if there isn't any specific provision for that, the argument would seem strong that they should refund in accordance with what should have happened on appeal.

ten7 · 21 Aug 2019

Hi all, I was going to post about this but see someone’s already beaten me to it. I had an email from London Travelwatch concerning this and they confirmed that I was correct in the interpretation of this part of the regulation. I will be thanking my local MP but also would like to thank everyone on this forum for all your advice.

furlong · 21 Aug 2019

ten7 said:
Hi all, I was going to post about this but see someone’s already beaten me to it. I had an email from London Travelwatch concerning this and they confirmed that I was correct in the interpretation of this part of the regulation. I will be thanking my local MP but also would like to thank everyone on this forum for all your advice.

Well if it was indeed your case that led to this today, I think congratulations are due for your persistence despite all the obstacles they put in your way! As I've said before, I don't actually think this changed in 2018 but just that the train companies had got away with misinterpreting the old wording ("full single fare") and continued doing this even after the new version clarified the intended meaning. Anyone who paid an earlier PF under the old rules in qualifying circumstances might also try to get their money returned by reference to the SRA documentation.

furlong · 21 Aug 2019

There are further problems - when an appeal is won, both old and new rules appear to require the entire payment made to be refunded, yet companies seemed to try to deduct the notional fare from the repayment, for which there was apparently no basis unless the passenger voluntarily agreed. If a fare was still due to be paid in these situations (and I have my doubts), that would be for them to pursue through the civil courts.

It will be interesting to see whether there are strings attached to accepting the refunds they are offering today - such as whether by accepting the refund someone is giving up the right to pursue the company through the courts for the rest of the money.

Paul Kelly · 21 Aug 2019

furlong said:
the train companies had got away with misinterpreting the old wording ("full single fare")

Another twist on this is that at one stage First Great Western attempted to define a new ticket type called a "Full Day Return" for certain journeys. For example here is the full list of "ANY PERMITTED" fares from Reading to Oxford in NFM95 (current as of January 2007). You can see that they have introduced a very expensive "FULL DAY RTN" ticket type. I don't know how long this lasted and I have a feeling it may have been removed due to DfT pressure. But it certainly suggests this "wilful misinterpretation" has some history to it!

Code:

Route:     0 ANY PERMITTED
Fare Setter: GWR FIRST GREAT WESTERN
         
7DF SEVEN DAY   1ST    R 1ST SEASON    ADULT:  £84.60   CHILD:  £42.30
FDR 1ST DAY RETURN     R 1ST RETURN    ADULT:  £31.60   CHILD:  £15.80
FCR 1ST CHEAP DAY   B3 R 1ST RETURN    ADULT:  £20.90   CHILD:  £10.45
FDS 1ST DAY SINGLE     R 1ST SINGLE    ADULT:  £15.80   CHILD:   £7.90
7DS SEVEN DAY   STD    R STD SEASON    ADULT:  £45.70   CHILD:  £22.85

SDN FULL DAY RTN       R STD RETURN    ADULT:  £19.40   CHILD:   £9.70
NAR NETWORK AWAYBRK 4A R STD RETURN    ADULT:  £18.00   CHILD:   £9.00
SDR STD DAY RETURN     R STD RETURN    ADULT:  £11.00   CHILD:   £5.50
CDR CHEAP DAY RTN   B3 R STD RETURN    ADULT:   £9.40   CHILD:   £4.70
SDS STD DAY SINGLE     R STD SINGLE    ADULT:   £9.70   CHILD:   £4.85
CDS CHEAP DAY SGL   B3 R STD SINGLE    ADULT:   £9.30   CHILD:   £4.65

Lemmy99uk · 21 Aug 2019

yorkie said:
What we need is more of the ScotRail Stratchlyde model where friendly helpful polite ticket inspectors keenly walk through the train selling tickets at every opportunity.

I think many TOCs would aspire to this model, but the long dispute on Northern shows how hard it would be to implement.

furlong · 21 Aug 2019

Hadders said:
it is quite disgraceful that such a fundamental change was able to be introduced without being properly briefed to all staff.

I think it's just more evidence of how detached from the day-to-day reality the DfT had allowed itself to become. If the SRA was still there, I can't imagine these problems would have been allowed to linger unresolved for so long. There was no change so there was nothing to communicate - the already-existing rules were just expressed more clearly.

thedbdiboy · 21 Aug 2019

yorkie said:
Not only are they too high but there are numerous instances of them being incorrectly issued.

The train companies are getting away with braking the law, with no comeback for passengers.

We are talking huge sums in some cases! Some train companies are happy to prosecute people who underpay by small amounts and yet they think they can get away with overcharging people by much larger amounts.

It's not a level playing field. Change is needed to decriminalise railway ticketing matters. No other industry alienates, mistreats and bamboozles their customers to such an extent.

Bantamzen said:
Well it is ultimately the responsibility of the DfT to ensure it does. If they do not apply & enforce the required checks & measures, then Parliament needs to intervene.

Bantamzen gets where the problem lies. Unfortunately, Parliament's approach to Brexit does not bode well for their ability to coherently hold anyone to account.

Again and again, train companies are berated for getting things wrong, but they are contracted to the DfT, whose capability to administer and manage these issues is woefully inadequate. Train companies have a mish mash of outdated and inconsistent laws at their disposal try to enforce revenue protection, but they fail both passengers and operators - the former are subject to ridiculous jeopardies such as Byelaw 18, whilst the latter have either the pathetic £20 or twice the single fare penalty or the often disproportionately draconian court prosecution option. It works for no-one but whilst the train companies might not be lily white, please ask yourself:
- who is in charge of the railways (er...the government)
- who is in charge of the law (er...ditto, through Parliament).

I do not to argue against the wrong done to passengers but please recognise where the seat of incompetence lies. One day I am tempted to tell the whole sorry tale of the attempts we made in the industry to update the Penalty Fare legislation and it's endless pathetic failure under successive Labour, Coalition and Tory run administrations, but I'll save that for another time.....in the meantime, for those who cry 'nationalise', please stop and think for a minute who you actually want in charge.

ainsworth74 · 21 Aug 2019

thedbdiboy said:
One day I am tempted to tell the whole sorry tale of the attempts we made in the industry to update the Penalty Fare legislation and it's endless pathetic failure under successive Labour, Coalition and Tory run administrations, but I'll save that for another time.....

Let us know when that time is because, I for one, will want to be in the front row! :lol:

Tetchytyke · 21 Aug 2019

Bantamzen said:
If so then suspending them all will just signal a free-for-all for people wishing to travel without paying

No, it will signal to the fat cats that they can't just make the rules up as they go along.

If a TOC routinely overcharges people with Penalty Fares, it should lose the right to issue them. It might focus a few minds.

Tetchytyke · 21 Aug 2019

thedbdiboy said:
One day I am tempted to tell the whole sorry tale of the attempts we made in the industry to update the Penalty Fare legislation and it's endless pathetic failure

I'll be there with the popcorn, yeah?

thedbdiboy said:
Again and again, train companies are berated for getting things wrong, but they are contracted to the DfT, whose capability to administer and manage these issues is woefully inadequate.

Except nobody is contracted to DfT on ticketing issues?

This is an industry problem, but of course RDG members will try and blame everyone else for their failure.

If a TOC can't be trusted to issue Penalty Fares correctly, they should lose the right to issue them.

thedbdiboy said:
the latter have either the pathetic £20 or twice the single fare penalty

Why is a £20 charge for an honest error- which is what PFs were designed for- "pathetic"? It's a reasonable deterrent- or it would be if TOCs got their house in order with revenue collection.

tony_mac · 21 Aug 2019

Arctic Troll said:
Why is a £20 charge for an honest error- which is what PFs were designed for- "pathetic"? It's a reasonable deterrent- or it would be if TOCs got their house in order with revenue collection.

They weren't really designed for honest errors - they were designed to mostly catch fare evaders but with the knowledge that some honest errors would also be caught.

It's not a meaningful deterrent compared to the normal fares for a regular fare evader. You would have to be catching people an awful lot (as in once or twice a week) to make it cheaper to pay the fares instead of just the odd penalty.

Tetchytyke · 21 Aug 2019

tony_mac said:
You would have to be catching people an awful lot (as in once or twice a week) to make it cheaper to pay the fares instead of just the odd penalty.

Any penalty is only a deterrent if you think you'll actually have to pay it. Even £80, as on TfL services, only works as a deterrent with strong revenue protection.

Don't forget a PF is only to the next station, not the destination, and £20 is the minimum PF. I'd say it's fine as a deterrent. A PF shouldn't be a revenue generator.

Starmill · 22 Aug 2019

thedbdiboy said:
It works for no-one

In what sense does it work for nobody? My direct experience is of being threatened with a £20 Penalty Fare for a journey that ought have cost £3 because the ticket machine wasn't working.

Charging people £20 or double the normal fare through intimidation seems to work pretty darn well to me if you're a train company?

Penalty Fares - Thousands of Passengers Overcharged

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Forum Staff

Established Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Verified Rep - BR Fares

Member

Established Member

Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member