£1000 bill for travelling on Virgin Trains on a 'LM only' ticket.

[Clip]

At one station a TPE train rolled in, going to our destination. He couldn't understand why we couldn't catch it. Even after explanation - to him it was *just a train* and he couldn't comprehend British Rail being split up into different companies.

The irony of this post being that BR itself was formed by the amalgamation of different train companies. Which, depending on how old your dad is,couldve been something he may remember.

 

[infobleep]

With regard to "Virgin Trains Only" tickets, my colleague has input the auto announcement that they are not valid on the LM services to Birmingham New Street when it announces these services. Not sure if this is now audible at Euston but it is at Watford Junction. The other LM services stopping at Milton Keynes (including Crewe Services) do not yet have such an announcement attached though.

Glad to hear something is being done because it always seems to one sided to me. As in well let LM passengers know they are not allowed but we won't tell Virgin passengers. If LM passengers needed to know then why wouldn't Virgin passengers need to know as well.

 

[infobleep]

I'm pretty sure that Euston has always announced that too

Nor as far as I remember hearing. I use to travel daily on the trains to Tring and the 8.24 to Milton Keynes. Yes they don't go as far as the Virgin trains but I don't see why that should matter.

 

[infobleep]

You are saying T's and C's are *one of them things* and then, admitting, as an insider, they can stump you as much as the passenger.
let's go through the bits in bold.
1. Confusing for passengers. It's confusing for rail staff, never mind passengers.
2. Take down their name. Some use that is when they can deny they have ever had the conversation! Passengers need a hidden camera with sould to prove they are right.
3. How on earth is every passenger supposed to know every tiny rule that covers their journey? Is every rule printed on the back of a tiny BR ticket?
4. If you're not so sure, pity the walk-on customer!
5. Rail staff are unlikely to give out false information if ticketing wasn't do darned complicated.
Thanks for the answer and I'm genuinely not *having a go*, in fact the opposite, when you read into it it seems passengers and staff are singing from the same sheet.
ADDS - I suppose with my background, if I were half bothered I could easily become a lay magistrate. If, in my court, a TOC and a passenger were at odds over a ticket, I can't see many occasions when the TOC's would win their case. With all these rules and regulations, it possibly makes it more difficult to prove someone even entirely without a ticket at all is travellng illegally.

Cameras are fairly cheap these days so it would be very easy for you to walk around everywhere with a hidden camera. I don't know the legalities of whether it could be used in court but you certainly could do it fairly cheaply. I guess you might need multiple depending on battery life and charging of the cameras.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Nor as far as I remember hearing. I use to travel daily on the trains to Tring and the 8.24 to Milton Keynes. Yes they don't go as far as the Virgin trains but I don't see why that should matter.

In my experience of travelling on LM Trent Valley trains, the announcement "Tickets marked Virgin Trains Only are not valid on this service" is played

 

[455driver]

In my opinion, all this talk of 'complicated' tickets stems from people buying the cheapest possible ticket from the TVM or not telling the TO staff what they actually want!

Ticketing can be very easy indeed (just buy an expensive ticket) but if you want to make it as cheap as posible then it can get very complicated indeed, and of course everything in between!

 

[nw1]

I think you're getting caught up on the headline £1000 figure. To repeat earlier posts: there were 39 people in the party so the actual charge was about £25 per head. Which was the difference between the tickets they held and the tickets that were valid on that train.

So, technically, the £1000 was wrong - they should have been charged for brand-new tickets which cost over twice as much!

If you take the £1000 out of the picture, it boils down to "Man got on wrong train with cheaper ticket, guard gives him an excess so that he's paid the right fare." A non-story if you ask me.

Actually it wasn't the £1000 thing I was commenting about tbh - I did say something along the lines of "I'm not commenting on whether it's right or wrong in this case" - as the £1000 was as you say split between lots of people.

I was more objecting to hardline attitudes on the railway in general rather than the specifics of this case. People should not be penalised for applying common sense, and, though it's been explained in another post why 15:07 is considered peak, a lot of people would not even think of 15:07 as peak.

A good solution to avoid penalising passengers at terminal stations would be to have proper manned barriers in action all the time. Then the staff could point out the non-validity of a ticket, or lack of railcard, before the passenger gets on the train and possibly gets penalised.

Early ticket checks in trains like the Birmingham case and offering passengers with non-valid tickets the chance to get off the train early (e.g Coventry), and thus only incurring the cost of a Birmingham-Coventry single, would help too.

 

[najaB]

I was more objecting to hardline attitudes on the railway in general rather than the specifics of this case.

Fair enough. But what everyone (myself included) needs to bear in mind is that any view of the railway based on the Disputes & Prosecutions section is going to be skewed - the doubtless hundreds (or thousands) of people who are given 'benefit of the doubt' on a daily basis aren't going to be posting here.

 

[nw1]

Fair enough. But what everyone (myself included) needs to bear in mind is that any view of the railway based on the Disputes & Prosecutions section is going to be skewed - the doubtless hundreds (or thousands) of people who are given 'benefit of the doubt' on a daily basis aren't going to be posting here.

Yeah fair point. It's just certain postings on here make me see red

 

[yorkie]

For some people, a ticket saying London Midland Trains only means they can only use trains that go between London and the Midlands. And to them, that's obviously what it means..

Well they'll just have to learn about the industry structure the hard way won't they. Ignorance of a rule does not provide an excuse to break that rule.

Can anyone who goes on about "learning things the hard way", and "ignorance is no excuse", honestly say that they have not made a mistake in their life? I'm not making a comment about whether the £1000 was right or wrong in this case, btw, but the "assumption of guilt" attitude made in many posts on here really does annoy me.

I completely agree. People who make a mistake should be charged an excess fare. The Virgin Trains Guard clearly agrees as that's what he did.

However the official rule is that a new ticket can be charged.

There is no good reason for that, and I am pleased to see Guards being given the ability to apply a common sense approach.

There is this bizarre situation that if a passenger buys a walk-up return ticket intended for Chiltern and boards Virgin, they are charged an excess (half the difference up to the appropriate fare, railcard discountable) yet if a passenger buys a walk-up return ticket intended for LM and boards Virgin, they can be charged a new full fare ticket, non-discountable.

And before anyone goes on about revenue allocation, that's a red herring as an excess of a "Route via High Wycombe" ticket wouldn't re-allocate the revenue allocation for the original ticket held, and yet if someone goes to Euston ticket office and says they want to go via High Wycombe one way, and via MKC the other way, that is exactly what they'd be sold.

In the case this thread specifically refers to, the passenger was charged an appropriate excess fare and the amount was clearly reasonable.

I have forgotten railcards, for example, in the past - luckily I realised before I bought the ticket, so I bought the full-price no-discount ticket... but if they'd tried to prosecute me for that I would have been exceedingly annoyed, to put it mildly. I'd hope no worse than PF would apply in such cases, but reading some things on here, it appears not.

FCC would have threatened to prosecute you, while some TOCs would merely charge the difference. Some charge a new full fare ticket and allow a refund. And loads of other possibilities. There is no national policy.

Agree completely with this post. I mean, 15:07 peak! How many people finish work at 1445 (guestimate of the latest you could finish to make a 15:07 train - probably more like 1415 to 1430 in London...)

Blame the DfT and their predecessors, as they are the ones who set 1500 as a time that could be considered "peak" for travel out of London. Most Train Companies give us more generous terms.

That said, I do the "Banbury split" thing when travelling up north on XC, to take advantage of the Network card. Recently there was a major incident at Banbury meaning nothing was running through there, and they hadn't organised buses yet - but I asked two separate Virgin staff (one station, one train) at New St whether my split ticket would be valid on VT to London (which they were recommending people travel by). Both said yes - even though I didn't travel through Banbury at all! Don't know if those staff were correct - they may have been given there was an incident - but good on them for their attitude I say

Was ticket acceptance in place? If so, the ticket was valid. If not, it wasn't. I suspect it was!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I was more objecting to hardline attitudes on the railway in general rather than the specifics of this case....

The vast majority of railway staff do not have a hardline attitude. However some do, and I agree that is a problem that needs addressing. There's an EC guard who is infamous among railway staff in my area for catching them out more than the general public!

A good solution to avoid penalising passengers at terminal stations would be to have proper manned barriers in action all the time. Then the staff could point out the non-validity of a ticket, or lack of railcard, before the passenger gets on the train and possibly gets penalised.

Given that there can be 500+ people on an Inter City train, with departures every few minutes, this would be unbelievably labour intensive. To avoid delays and unsafe conditions, trains would need to be ready earlier, and you'd have to manually individually gate each train separately. This is totally impracticable at stations like King's Cross.

Early ticket checks in trains like the Birmingham case and offering passengers with non-valid tickets the chance to get off the train early (e.g Coventry), and thus only incurring the cost of a Birmingham-Coventry single, would help too.

I agree, though in practice Virgin Trains only tend to check tickets on the expensive part of those services And to be fair, could a TM go through an entire train between BHM & COV? No..

 

[Starmill]

And before anyone goes on about revenue allocation, that's a red herring as an excess to a "Route via High Wycombe" ticket wouldn't re-allocate the revenue allocation for the original ticket held, and yet if someone goes to Euston ticket office and says they want to go via High Wycombe one way, and via MKC the other way, that is exactly what they'd be sold.

I agree. If there were one change I could make that would reduce conflict and make the railway less hostile it would be to remove the silly rule about not excessing TOC only tickets. What's more it wouldn't cost the industry a penny, other than what it would take for that message to be passed out to all staff.

 

[Deerfold]

I agree. If there were one change I could make that would reduce conflict and make the railway less hostile it would be to remove the silly rule about not excessing TOC only tickets. What's more it wouldn't cost the industry a penny, other than what it would take for that message to be passed out to all staff.

What about the loss of the difference between the cost of an excess and the cost of a new ticket?

 

[Haywain]

Different TOCs have peak flows at different times - there's no one definition of "peak" that would be suitable to all of them. Offhand, I can't think of a TOC whose peak times in a given direction from any station cover more than 6 out of 24 hours.

I suggest you look at a number of London Terminals stations and the tickets that the general public would consider to really be off peak (ie. Super Off Peak tickets).

 

[Flamingo]

Fair enough. But what everyone (myself included) needs to bear in mind is that any view of the railway based on the Disputes & Prosecutions section is going to be skewed - the doubtless hundreds (or thousands) of people who are given 'benefit of the doubt' on a daily basis aren't going to be posting here.

Just to put this into perspective, I have been a guard on Intercity trains for nine years. I sell several hundred tickets a month. Pretty much every station I work from has a booking office and/or TVM, therefore probably 80-90% of passengers I sell a ticket to is in breach of bylaw 18. As I have documented before, I don't bother charging people on Advance tickets, Off-Peak on Peak trains, or with missing or out-of-date Railcards any more unless they totally fail the attitude test, as I have got fed up with my "uncaring moneygrabbing TOC management who set out to trip up the confused passenger" telling me I have to be more flexible, when the complaints they were excessed up to the correct fare hit Customer Services.

In the nine years I have been a guard, I have known eight people I have asked for a ticket go to court on charges relating to them not having a valid ticket.

Two of them (seperate incidents) assaulted me when I tried to sell them a ticket from a manned station, one of them then assaulted an off-duty police officer who joined in to stop him punching me again. With both, the ticket issue was thrown in along with the assault charge.

One assaulted me (threaths and kicked me) when I tried to excess his DSB railcard ticket his mother had bought with her railcard (half a one-month return) and then assaulted the police that met the train.

One verbally threatened me three times, twice as I tried to sell him a ticket, and third time as I tried to get him to give me his name and address to fill in a UFN. Again from a manned station. Again, he was taken off the train in handcuffs.

Two were traveling on family & friends adult & child ticket (from London to West Wales) despite being boyfriend & girlfriend in their 20's, they refused to excess up to two adult tickets, and when invited to leave the train at the next stop they went and locked themselves in the toilet. When BTP removed them several stops later they turned out to have a lot of previous, which was why court was involved.

The other two were UFN's who did not pay the UFN. (One of them had tried to persuade me that he was a police officer on duty and entitled to free travel - unfortunately for him I had a BTP officer on the train, and it was quickly established he was not a police officer - despite his deception, I still gave him a UFN and allowed him to complete his three-hour journey, rather than kicking him off a train several hundred miles from home - in the middle of the day, in good weather).

I only had to attend court for one of the assaults, all others plead guilty, and got fines or suspended sentences.

So, can one of the keyboard warriors on here tell me which of those eight was confused by the system, unfarely treated, taken advantage of, or otherwise a victim of an uncaring TOC and a system that is designed to trip up the unwary? I'm curious to know. I'm obviously missing something.

 

[richw]

Just to put this into perspective, I have been a guard on Intercity trains for nine years. I sell several hundred tickets a month. Pretty much every station I work from has a booking office and/or TVM, therefore probably 80-90% of passengers I sell a ticket to is in breach of bylaw 18. As I have documented before, I don't bother charging people on Advance tickets, Off-Peak on Peak trains, or with missing or out-of-date Railcards any more unless they totally fail the attitude test, as I have got fed up with my "uncaring moneygrabbing TOC management who set out to trip up the confused passenger" telling me I have to be more flexible, when the complaints they were excessed up to the correct fare hit Customer Services.

Is your approach the normal or the exception in your area?

I know in Cornwall the onboard staff are rather laid back with ticketing and will sell whatever asked for onboard even if validity is questionable.

On the other hand the ticket offices are the complete opposite. I wanted an off peak return to somewhere and the ticket office wouldn't sell me the ticket until the last peak service had left - It was at the platform, doors had been shut preparing to pull away.

 

[Starmill]

What about the loss of the difference between the cost of an excess and the cost of a new ticket?

Well they do not get that for route Via X tickets at present do they? And some people will not pay anything at all and just wait for their restricted-to TOCs train where they might have made the journey quicker on payment of the relevant difference. So it could even be revenue positive.

Furthermore, it's an illogical condition to have in the first place and also it would make life easier for on train staff who can then excess people rather than treating them as if they held no ticket, or penalty faring them, which is obviously unfair.

 

[yorkie]

Is your approach the normal or the exception in your area?

I know in Cornwall the onboard staff are rather laid back with ticketing and will sell whatever asked for onboard even if validity is questionable.

I think you may misunderstand Flamingo (or maybe I misunderstood your question!). I can assure you he is laid back! Sadly some of his customers are not.

The problems described arose because passengers did not co-operate with very reasonable requests to excess their tickets (which is more lenient than the T&Cs state, in many cases!).

On the other hand the ticket offices are the complete opposite. I wanted an off peak return to somewhere and the ticket office wouldn't sell me the ticket until the last peak service had left - It was at the platform, doors had been shut preparing to pull away.

Did you write a letter to FGW detailing the incident, and asking if they instruct their staff to comply with the concept of "Buy anytime, travel off peak" (http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46548.aspx )? Did they provide you a date by when staff will have appropriate training? have you been back to test that appropriate training is in place?

 

[Flamingo]

Is your approach the normal or the exception in your area?

I know in Cornwall the onboard staff are rather laid back with ticketing and will sell whatever asked for onboard even if validity is questionable.

On the other hand the ticket offices are the complete opposite. I wanted an off peak return to somewhere and the ticket office wouldn't sell me the ticket until the last peak service had left - It was at the platform, doors had been shut preparing to pull away.

No, I have a reputation for being a ticket monster! It's due to my strange compulsion to check everybody's ticket and ensure everybody had something (and offer advice and assistance as the passenger may require - even if they don't want it!).

Also, I have a reputation for knowing the intricacies behind unusual or strange combinations (in no small part due to this forum), and for being able to pick out the troublesome and strange at 30 paces - and confronting rather than ignoring them (although I'm not the only one who does that).

I don't know a lot about the deepest darkest south-west, I never go there

 

[Deerfold]

Well they do not get that for route Via X tickets at present do they? And some people will not pay anything at all and just wait for their restricted-to TOCs train where they might have made the journey quicker on payment of the relevant difference. So it could even be revenue positive.

I thought we were talking about people already on the train?

Furthermore, it's an illogical condition to have in the first place and also it would make life easier for on train staff who can then excess people rather than treating them as if they held no ticket, or penalty faring them, which is obviously unfair.

I wasn't arguing about fairness or if it was logical - but if you charge people on the wrong ticket an excess instead of selling a new ticket I suspect you'll be taking in less money.

 

[Starmill]

I thought we were talking about people already on the train?

Well they will still end up with the price of the ticket that they would correctly have bought for their journey. Do you think they should get more because a passenger changes their mind?

I wasn't arguing about fairness or if it was logical - but if you charge people on the wrong ticket an excess instead of selling a new ticket I suspect you'll be taking in less money.

In what sort of business is that a reason not to do it? An exploitative and manipulative one.

This viewpoint is a perfect argument for nationalisation, the railway being run in a way that is against the interest of passengers in order to take more money.

 

[Flamingo]

Well they will still end up with the price of the ticket that they would correctly have bought for their journey. Do you think they should get more because a passenger changes their mind?



In what sort of business is that a reason not to do it? An exploitative and manipulative one.

This viewpoint is a perfect argument for nationalisation, the railway being run in a way that is against the interest of passengers in order to take more money.

In the current "privatised" state, the railway is receiving a huge taxpayer subsidy.

It is micromanaged by the DFT, with input from Passenger Focus, frequent surveys of passengers, and a media that queues up to run bad news stories of absolutely minimal accuracy or truth at every possible occasion.

It has terms and conditions of carriage that are widely available, very generous when compared with all other forms of publicly accessible transport terms of compensation and passengers rights, and is the most accessible without having to purchase a ticket, for 99% of passengers with little or no comeback.

Just WHAT is your problem? Is it because it is not free?

 

[cf111]

The closest they get is "LDN MIDLAND ONLY", which I think is obvious enough. "AP LDN MID ONLY" I agree is a problem - those could all quite easily be changed to "LDN MIDLAND ONLY" too (indeed I think they should be - isn't "AP TOC" non-standard?)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Wait, what do new tickets for that route say? "Only valid for travel on London Midland services"?

I'm not sure about the standards, but Scotrail advances have "AP SCOTRAIL ONLY" printed on them.

 

[Deerfold]

Well they will still end up with the price of the ticket that they would correctly have bought for their journey. Do you think they should get more because a passenger changes their mind?

In what sort of business is that a reason not to do it? An exploitative and manipulative one.

This viewpoint is a perfect argument for nationalisation, the railway being run in a way that is against the interest of passengers in order to take more money.

You appear to be disagreeing with a point I have not made. I merely disagreed with your suggestion that your suggested change would not cost the rail industry a penny.

 

[Starmill]

I'm not sure about the standards, but Scotrail advances have "AP SCOTRAIL ONLY" printed on them.

'AP NORTHERN ONLY'
'AP XC ONLY CNM'
'AP XC ONLY DBY'
'✠AP EMT& CONNECT'
'AP SWT ONLY'
'AP HULLTRNS ONLY'
'AP GC ONLY'
'AP EMT& CONNECT'
'AP FGW/ATW &CONN'
'AP TPE & CONNECT'
'AP TPE ONLY'
'AP SOUTHERN ONLY'


To name just a few. They're quite common really.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You appear to be disagreeing with a point I have not made. I merely disagreed with your suggestion that your suggested change would not cost the rail industry a penny.

Apologies - take that last about nationalisation out of the context of your point, it should have been more clearly denoted as not really aimed it your idea.

To sum up, I do take your point that it might lose them a little money, but reinforce my own conviction that that is money they should never have had in the first place, so it's not too much of a loss. I'm sure there are others who agree.

 

[richw]

I think you may misunderstand Flamingo (or maybe I misunderstood your question!). I can assure you he is laid back! Sadly some of his customers are not.

The problems described arose because passengers did not co-operate with very reasonable requests to excess their tickets (which is more lenient than the T&Cs state, in many cases!).


Did you write a letter to FGW detailing the incident, and asking if they instruct their staff to comply with the concept of "Buy anytime, travel off peak" (http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46548.aspx )? Did they provide you a date by when staff will have appropriate training? have you been back to test that appropriate training is in place?

I was trying to understand whether his laid back style is normal amongst colleagues in his area. Certainly normal amongst Cornwall staff.

 

[najaB]

To sum up, I do take your point that it might lose them a little money, but reinforce my own conviction that that is money they should never have had in the first place, so it's not too much of a loss. I'm sure there are others who agree.

Interesting idea - how do you come to that conclusion?

 

[Starmill]

Interesting idea - how do you come to that conclusion?

It's just been explained in three different ways...

- Other restrictive tickets can be excessed like this
- It adds up to the same fare paid as if the passenger had chosen that ticket originally
- Treating a passenger on the wrong TOC with a TOC only ticket as if they hold no ticket at all is overly harsh (especially in a Penalty Fare area)

Ergo I make the case for a fourth time! Clearly very little support for it, so they will continue to get away with it!

 

[reb0118]

I'm sure there are others who agree.

Nope. Just scrap TOC x only walk up fares - much simpler.

 

[Deerfold]

Nope. Just scrap TOC x only walk up fares - much simpler.

Given the TOC only fares are often the cheapest available are you happy to increase the average fare paid?

 

[Starmill]

Nope. Just scrap TOC x only walk up fares - much simpler.

Given the TOC only fares are often the cheapest available are you happy to increase the average fare paid?

Just make the TOC Only ones Any Permitted then :P