Staff rejecting tickets because the journey has commenced

yorkie · 15 Dec 2019

It doesn't take too long to find on Twitter numerous examples of passengers being incorrectly charged, overcharged, mistreated etc. by rogue staff at various train companies. I'd be here forever if I tried to list all the ones I found. There are many others that I get to know about through work, which obviously I can't post the details of unless the person goes public.

Anyway this example is particularly shocking so I felt it was worth highlighting.

A passenger is travelling from Shrewsbury to London, and they have a mobile ticket, shown in the Trainline app. The ticket was marked as "used" (which just means the journey has comenced) from Shrewsbury to Crewe, so the Train Manager of the next train decided to charge the customer from Crewe to Euston.

If the passenger complains, Avanti should ensure that a full investigation and, if appropriate, disciplinary proceedings are instigated against the person responsible for charging the passenger.

However I have no faith that appropriate action will be taken as these sorts of problems have been going on for a long time with no resolution in sight. Many train companies have insufficient safeguards in place to avoid contract and consumer law breaches occurring. If they asked someone competent to do some mystery shopping, dozens of breaches could be identified in a matter of days. They are incompetent and the rail industry is leaving itself wide open to legal action.

https://twitter.com/camportland/status/1206189472838230016

Clive Marcus said:
@AvantiWestCoast forcing me to buy a new ticket and treated like a criminal on the train. Even though I have my ticket. And charging me 80 quid for a 90 minute journey. Absolute bollocks! Where do I get my refund?

Avanti said:
What the reason yo were charged again? ^EA

Clive Marcus said:
Because it says ticket used but it hasn’t until today!

Avanti said:
If you wish to contest this, we would advise logging this with the Customer Resolutions team, here - https://avantiwestcoast.service-now.com/help_and_contact?id=submit_a_complaint ^EA

RailUK Forums

Hadders · 15 Dec 2019

Quite frankly this is shocking, Avanti should hang their heads in shame over this.

If I was the passenger I’d expect to be contacted by a senior manager (not a customer relations bid with a posh job title) to resolve the issue.

If not I’d be going to my MP and the press.

jamiearmley · 15 Dec 2019

When a ticket is scanned, it tells you how and when it was "used". For example, I would expect the history to show me that the barriers at Shrewsbury accepted the ticket, and perhaps a further scan en route from Shrewsbury to crewe. It's possible the person who charged again does not understand how this works and how this information can help them understand a situation. It's also possible I guess that this same history showed the ticket as having been used previously, or even refunded prior to travel. Whilst on the face of it it does indeed look as if a mistake has been made here, let's not convict the train crew involved without a full oversight of the facts, which we are unlikely to get access to.

FGW_DID · 15 Dec 2019

Would it not be a good idea to have the app read “valid ticket in use” or “valid ticket - journey commenced” and only show “tickets used” once they have been used or expired?

jfollows · 15 Dec 2019

This looks link another reason why I, and many of us on this forum, continue to advise people not to use this and other m-tickets. I would not personally use them under any circumstances, from any operator. A proper orange paper ticket or, at worst, an e-ticket is what I use, and in the latter case only ever with a printed copy to be on the safe side. It's not the technology, it's the implementation coupled with the lack of staff training (to be generous) or the incorrect employment of people incapable of doing their job properly.

yorkie · 15 Dec 2019

jamiearmley said:
When a ticket is scanned, it tells you how and when it was "used". For example, I would expect the history to show me that the barriers at Shrewsbury accepted the ticket, and perhaps a further scan en route from Shrewsbury to crewe. It's possible the person who charged again does not understand how this works and how this information can help them understand a situation.

It is totally unacceptable that adequate training is not being provided.

If anyone is in any doubt they must NOT charge the passenger; if they think something is untoward they can make a note of the detail for investigation later.

jamiearmley said:
It's also possible I guess that this same history showed the ticket as having been used previously, or even refunded prior to travel.

If the ticket was shown as being refunded prior to travel, then I would not expect a Crewe to London ticket to be issued; the matter should also be properly investigated as that would be an allegation of fraud. If that was the allegation, then why was it stated the ticket was "used" not "refunded"?

jamiearmley said:
Whilst on the face of it it does indeed look as if a mistake has been made here, let's not convict the train crew involved without a full oversight of the facts, which we are unlikely to get access to.

If the train crew are following correct procedures this would be an incredibly serious matter as it would demonstrate that Avanti as a company is completely and utterly in breach of consumer and contract legislation. Do you have any idea how serious that would be ?

If you have any evidence that Avanti or any other train company are instructing train crew to behave in the manner described I would be extremely interested to hear it; and I know a solicitor who would be extremely interested too. Please do get in touch if this is the case.

In the meantime I am prepared to keep an open mind as to how much of the blame goes to the company and how much to individual staff, but whatever the proportion of blame, the company is breaching the law, it's really just a matter of to what extent, and how widespread it is. I am keen to learn more about what extent companies are behaving inappropriately if anyone has information about this....

Ferret · 15 Dec 2019

Knew this would happen. The m-ticket system is wide open to fraud, and it’s always the innocent who get caught up in the crossfire when revenue protection staff try to catch the dodgers.

Intermodal · 15 Dec 2019

I'm not questioning at all that the behaviour by the Avanti TM was incorrect in this case but perhaps we should also consider whether work can be done to prevent the ticket "greying out" early, which also would have prevented this issue?

Ferret · 15 Dec 2019

Intermodal said:
I'm not questioning at all that the behaviour by the Avanti TM was incorrect in this case but perhaps we should also consider whether work can be done to prevent the ticket "greying out" early, which also would have prevented this issue?

Quite. It’s the flaws in the system that are its downfall, and leads precisely to situations like this.

Mag_seven · 15 Dec 2019

Ferret said:
The m-ticket system is wide open to fraud

Well if that's the case TOCs should just scrap the whole concept of m-tickets and keep it simple with either paper tickets or e-tickets with a QR code on them.

Baxenden Bank · 15 Dec 2019

Related to the OP and as a possible suggestion on how to deal with such issues.

I use m-tickets on my smartphone for local bus travel (First Potteries). Once activated a single ticket is valid for just 15 minutes, whilst the journey can last for up to 60 minutes. A clock ticks down from 15 minutes to zero, the ticket then moves from 'Active Tickets' to 'Expired Tickets'. Seemingly therefore I am travelling without a valid ticket to show to any inspector and am liable to a standard fare of £100. However, buried within the T and C's (or perhaps FAQ's) is a something like 'your expired ticket remains valid until you have completed your journey, show your expired ticket to an inspector'. I guess most passengers haven't actually thought about this potential problem, and if confronted with it would expect the inspector to know about the continued validity of an expired ticket.

Obviously a rail ticket remains valid until the journey is completed, not until some point immediately after activation. This really should not need explaining to any member of staff checking tickets in any capacity! One could pass through the barriers at Shrewsbury (and thus your ticket is activated / shown as used) some time before your train actually departs (to have a coffee for example), never mind several hours later - having made a connection or two.

As an aside, why use the terminology 'outbound' and 'inbound' when those words are not used on proper tickets?

the sniper · 15 Dec 2019

Mag_seven said:
Well if that's the case TOCs should just scrap the whole concept of m-tickets and keep it simple with either paper tickets or e-tickets with a QR code on them.

They should, but the flood gates are open now. It's got to the point where people on the ground don't even know whether random 'ticket' formats on apps or paper are actually tickets or not, let alone whether the journey details shown on them are valid...

jamiearmley · 15 Dec 2019

I can't actually tell from the screenshots if it is a m- ticket (colour bar) or e- ticket (white pdf style). When I check revenue, the same initial screen seems to result in either when opened. If anyone knows how to tell from the screenshots can they share that info?

And yorkie, I agree with everything you say. I do however think that we need more info to determine right or wrong. I'd love a screenshot of the actual ticket : i could scan the qr code then and share with the forum what comes up. It might make interesting reading!

For my part, I always err on the side of caution. I tend to find sitting down with the passenger, doing some research together and both arriving at the same conclusion generally gives better outcomes for both sides, and is a better approach to customer service.

Ferret · 15 Dec 2019

Mag_seven said:
Well if that's the case TOCs should just scrap the whole concept of m-tickets and keep it simple with either paper tickets or e-tickets with a QR code on them.

They can’t! Politicians have decreed...

gray1404 · 15 Dec 2019

I notice the TM didn't apply a railcard discount either, but they should not have charged in the first place.

I personally when been told my valid ticket isn't valid, have always refused to pay anything additional. I don't see that point in paying something that I do not need to pay in the first place. However, I have always been most clear that my refusal to pay is on the basis I have a valid ticket. On two occasions this has resulted in me being asked for my name and address. Again, I have refused to give it (once they wanted to report me, the second time it was to attempt to issue an unpaid fares notice). Again, I refused to provide such on the basis that I had a valid ticket. However, I understand there is a level of risk required in this approach and many people, though not familiar with the rules, would not want to take this.

I really would advise refusing to pay anything more in such circumstances though.

Bletchleyite · 15 Dec 2019

gray1404 said:
I really would advise refusing to pay anything more in such circumstances though.

I'm not sure I would. You could end up in Court which could be difficult to actually defend. The likes of TIL don't listen to reason.

If you want to make a point it would be better to pay and claim the fare back, initially via Customer Services but if necessary via the Small Claims Court.

Bletchleyite · 15 Dec 2019

jamiearmley said:
I can't actually tell from the screenshots if it is a m- ticket (colour bar) or e- ticket (white pdf style). When I check revenue, the same initial screen seems to result in either when opened. If anyone knows how to tell from the screenshots can they share that info?

Avanti are doing what LNR do, which is issuing tickets that are sent as a PDF by e-mail but are also downloaded to the app as if they were m-tickets, requiring activation etc. This awkward workaround causes a lot of confusion, particularly where it comes to multi-day break of journey (is that what happened?) Presumably the passenger could have showed the ticket from this e-mail.

The actual Trainline app seems to be the only one that does it properly.

Edit: I see it actually was the Trainline app. I have never seen it do that automatically. Did the OP perhaps click the "mark as used" link on the ticket which does kill it off, primarily so it isn't cluttering up the list of tickets? This marks the whole return ticket as used, and you are warned that if you do it it is invalidated, it is effectively defacing the ticket.

_toommm_ · 15 Dec 2019

gray1404 said:
I notice the TM didn't apply a railcard discount either, but they should not have charged in the first place.

I personally when been told my valid ticket isn't valid, have always refused to pay anything additional. I don't see that point in paying something that I do not need to pay in the first place. However, I have always been most clear that my refusal to pay is on the basis I have a valid ticket. On two occasions this has resulted in me being asked for my name and address. Again, I have refused to give it (once they wanted to report me, the second time it was to attempt to issue an unpaid fares notice). Again, I refused to provide such on the basis that I had a valid ticket. However, I understand there is a level of risk required in this approach and many people, though not familiar with the rules, would not want to take this.

I really would advise refusing to pay anything more in such circumstances though.

I took this approach with a TPE guard too, when he tried to report me for using an unusual ticket despite having a valid itinerary - his words were 'but that's TheTrainLine, this is TransPennine'. Cue threats of police at Manchester Victoria etc... I even apologised for being sarcastic as I know I can be inadvertently!

yorkie · 15 Dec 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Edit: I see it actually was the Trainline app. I have never seen it do that automatically. ...

I thought it did? (@robbeech ?)

Bletchleyite · 15 Dec 2019

yorkie said:
I thought it did? (@robbeech ?)

If it does, on what basis does it do it? I haven't seen it at all and I'm fairly sure I have used a return e-ticket on the actual Trainline app. I have used the button to "mark used" on getting home from a trip when Delay Repay is not needing to be claimed, in order to unclutter the app, though.

Even if the app did do it, though, presumably you could still use the e-ticket PDF sent by e-mail at the time you book it. Unless we are saying Avanti/Trainline/whoever are cancelling e-tickets valid for a month with break of journey permitted on the day of first scan, in which case that is a very serious bug indeed. (I see no particular reason they shouldn't do that on tickets where Break of Journey is prohibited, though it would make more sense not to do it until 0430 on day 3, because even if BoJ is not permitted it might still be needed for a journey not possible in one day).

sheff1 · 15 Dec 2019

gray1404 said:
I really would advise refusing to pay anything more in such circumstances though.

Bletchleyite said:
I'm not sure I would. You could end up in Court which could be difficult to actually defend.

If it could be difficult to defend in Court a charge of failing to produce a valid ticket when one has produced a valid ticket there must be serious problems with the Court system.

Bletchleyite · 15 Dec 2019

sheff1 said:
If it could be difficult to defend in Court a charge of failing to produce a valid ticket when one has produced a valid ticket there must be serious problems with the Court system.

It's not a valid ticket. The apparent fact that it has been invalidated (defaced, effectively) incorrectly is the problem. Similarly, if a Guard defaced a paper ticket incorrectly, e.g. by tearing it in half, it would still not be valid even if that act was incorrect.

sheff1 · 15 Dec 2019

Bletchleyite said:
It's not a valid ticket. The apparent fact that it has been invalidated (defaced, effectively) incorrectly is the problem.

I was referring to the situation(s) described by gray1404 in the post you quoted. No one on here can say with 100% certainty* whether the ticket in the OP was valid - I note you use the words "apparent fact".

* unless they are the passenger

Adam Williams · 15 Dec 2019

Trying to understand how a ticket ends up in this state. Is anyone familiar enough with the app to comment? I see the Android app has this explanatory text:

trainline/res/values/strings.xml: <string name="manage_my_booking_mark_as_used_dialog_message">"Marking tickets as used means they'll appear as expired in the app. You won't be able to travel with an expired ticket."</string>
trainline/res/values/strings.xml: <string name="manage_my_booking_mark_as_used_dialog_title">Mark as used</string>
trainline/res/values/strings.xml: <string name="managed_booking_mark_ticket_as_unused">Mark as unused</string>
trainline/res/values/strings.xml: <string name="managed_booking_mark_ticket_as_used">Mark as used</string>
trainline/res/values/strings.xml: <string name="ticket_mobile_atoc_watermark_used">Used Ticket</string>

Obviously this only definitely holds for Android and not iOS but I assume it's a similar story in Apple-world.

I don't understand why you'd ever want to do this, or what the purpose of doing this is? Can "used tickets" be easily marked back as unused?

jamiearmley said:
When a ticket is scanned, it tells you how and when it was "used". For example, I would expect the history to show me that the barriers at Shrewsbury accepted the ticket, and perhaps a further scan en route from Shrewsbury to crewe. It's possible the person who charged again does not understand how this works and how this information can help them understand a situation. It's also possible I guess that this same history showed the ticket as having been used previously, or even refunded prior to travel. Whilst on the face of it it does indeed look as if a mistake has been made here, let's not convict the train crew involved without a full oversight of the facts, which we are unlikely to get access to.

Are we sure this is actually an eTicket (for which I think you're 100% correct), or an mTicket? The impression I get is that Trainline issue both, though I hold the opinion that there is little reason to want to continue to issue mTickets.

yorkie · 15 Dec 2019

Bletchleyite said:
It's not a valid ticket. The apparent fact that it has been invalidated (defaced, effectively) incorrectly is the problem. Similarly, if a Guard defaced a paper ticket incorrectly, e.g. by tearing it in half, it would still not be valid even if that act was incorrect.

It is a valid ticket!

It's cropped up many times on here and on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/robjbeech/status/1122434505728561152 ( @robbeech )

Your ticket is valid until it expires. The terms and conditions are based on those of the national rail conditions of travel. Trainline cannot override these. The ticket (despite saying used at the top) is perfectly valid until it expires....

Adam Williams said:
Are we sure this is actually an eTicket (for which I think you're 100% correct), or an mTicket? The impression I get is that Trainline issue both, though I hold the opinion that there is little reason to want to continue to issue mTickets.

Trainline do indeed issue both e-tickets and m-tickets; the customer said it was an m-ticket but I do not know for sure.

If it's an e-ticket there will also be an accompanying PDF, but if it is an m-ticket there won't be.

Bletchleyite · 15 Dec 2019

yorkie said:
It is a valid ticket!

Is it? It's effectively been defaced - the same as writing "NOT VALID" across it in biro. A defaced ticket is not valid. It should be, but it isn't.

Bletchleyite · 15 Dec 2019

Adam Williams said:
I don't understand why you'd ever want to do this, or what the purpose of doing this is?

Primarily to remove clutter from the app because it doesn't (in my experience) happen automatically. If for instance I've bought an Off Peak Return and used the whole ticket within a weekend (as I mostly do), there is no reason I would want it clogging up the app for the remaining 28 days or so of supposed validity, not least because I might confuse it with an actually unused return half and try to travel on it, which would not be valid because it's been used, and render me liable to prosecution. So you can click "mark used" and it greys and goes down the bottom. You can then click "remove ticket" and it disappears entirely.

It's the electronic equivalent of tearing an unmarked return half of an Off Peak (or Anytime) Return in half, and throwing it in the bin so it doesn't pointlessly clutter my wallet. This is something I do pretty much every time I arrive back from a weekend away at Bletchley and the barriers are open.

Can "used tickets" be easily marked back as unused?

Just like tearing a ticket in half and throwing it in the bin (which it basically is), no, it cannot be reversed.

yorkie · 15 Dec 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Is it? It's effectively been defaced - the same as writing "NOT VALID" across it in biro. A defaced ticket is not valid. It should be, but it isn't.

Incorrect. A member of rail staff cannot invalidate a ticket in this way. It remains valid.

Wallsendmag · 15 Dec 2019

If only we could see the barcode.

Adam Williams · 15 Dec 2019

Bletchleyite said:
It's the electronic equivalent of tearing an unmarked return half of an Off Peak (or Anytime) Return in half, and throwing it in the bin so it doesn't pointlessly clutter my wallet. This is something I do pretty much every time I arrive back from a weekend away at Bletchley and the barriers are open.

Just like tearing a ticket in half and throwing it in the bin (which it basically is), no, it cannot be reversed.

Hmm, interesting. For what it's worth, I asked if it could be reversed because of the managed_booking_mark_ticket_as_unused string. I guess this is unused?

Anyway, it sounds like this functionality does have some value after the journey is complete, but it would be better labelled "delete" or "move to trash"/similar.

Staff rejecting tickets because the journey has commenced

Forum Staff

Attachments

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member