Amount of cash raised by TOC's in fines and UPN's etc

[jb]

This sums up quite neatly why allowing private companies with shareholder return as their only motive enforce the law sits very uneasily with me. Catching one person and charging them £100 in 'costs' is far far cheaper than getting 27 people to buy a ticket (assuming the average price of a ticket is £3.70)

I think everyone on here agrees that the best solution is one that means everyone who uses the railway pays for their journey. However, that solution is expensive (gate every station and have it manned from first to last train).

This line of thinking - both paragraphs - implies no responsibility on the part of the passenger whatsoever and that, in some way, is the heart of the problem.

 

[Tibbs]

This line of thinking - both paragraphs - implies no responsibility on the part of the passenger whatsoever and that, in some way, is the heart of the problem.

No it doesn't. I don't imply anything. If I think something I say it directly, don't fall into the trap a lot fall into on this forum and read more than what's written. I choose my words carefully.

Some people don't take their responsibilities seriously, but we know that's true, hence fare evaders.

I'm sure some people are frightened enough by seeing others caught to start buying tickets, but I would suggest most evaders aren't.

It's easy to sit there and say "passengers should know their responsibilities" as if that solves everything but we live in the real world. If everyone took their responsibilities seriously you could do away with all revenue staff and just have a big bucket of money at the entrance to each station (together with a card machine) for people to sling their fares into and take their change out of. However, we know that TOCs would go bankrupt in days if they did that.

There will always be people who try to evade fares. However, TOCs will always choose the method of enforcement that brings the most profit, not the method that leads to the most people paying, because they have to.

It's possible that getting the most people to pay (which is the ideal) is the most profitable route, but we know it isn't or the TOCs would be doing it.

 

[jb]

You are saying - not implying - that "people only pay because they have to" (trivially true) and "people avoid paying if they can" are one and the same. It's hooey.

 

[Tibbs]

Real world evidence shows that some people need to be made to pay.

Why is this news to you?

 

[Tibbs]

And before I forget - if most travellers had a choice, I think they would pay less for their travel. Again, I don't see this as particularly shocking.

Look at museums in London. The natural history museum has a suggested donation of (I think) £5. When people have a choice, how much do they put in? I would put a lot of money on the average donation being less than a fiver. I love that place and whenever I go I stick in £10, sometimes £20 if I'm having a good month. I value the NHM at more than the £5 they do, but not many others do. I suspect the railways are the same.

 

[daccer]

I think the title given to RPI's actually does give away how the modern railway thinks with regards to ticket sales and enforcement. These guys are Revenue Protection Inspectors not ticket sellers or ticket inspectors.

There are many different ways to protect revenue and the hardest one is to ensure that everyone who travels has the correct ticket. I believe that many TOC's now try and maximise revenue by accepting a certain level of ticketless travel knowing full well that they will catch a certain number of miscreants which will help balance the loss of revenue. They also know that to try and enforce 100% ticketed travel is very costly and target areas where revenue can be maximised.

A point made earlier in the thread mentioned possible long distance operators wanting people to try and travel without tickets knowing that they can catch them on the train with pricey anytime fares. Again morally this may be wrong but it is hard to sympathise with someone who woudl travel for free if they weren't caught.

I would assume the majority of fare avoidance is for local trips maybe costing a couple of quid. This means if you are caught then you pay a disproportionate amount to the original fare. I believe you travel without a ticket you get what you deserve. I think most people know what they are doing and see it as a calculated gamble.

If you make a genuine mistake then I believe the PF scheme can help or discretion will be shown.

The last thing i have to say is with regards to advance tickets etc. I have seen threads on here where people claim not to know the t+c's attached to these tickets. This always baffles me as they took the time to log onto a website and go through a complex purchasing procedure and yet couldn't be bothered to understand the restrictions attached to such a cheap ticket.

Deep down fare avoidance comes down to the individual concerned and the way they view right and wrong. The reason we have ticket gates and RPI's and all the other paraphenalia of revenue protection is because not enough of us are honest enough to work on an honour system. It is the way the world is going and I can only see revenue protection becoming more and more draconian and penalties increasing rapidly.

 

[neilmc]

I don't think right and wrong are clear cut. Yes you should pay for your train fare but how much? Should you use a legal loophole to pay far less than most other people? Should a TOC charge a ludicrous and ever-increasing sum for peak travel simply because they know they can? Should a TOC fail to provide ticket machines or adequate fare collection on trains then try to entrap ticketless passengers at their destination? And if the destination also had no means of paying and you unintentionally gained a free journey should you feel morally obliged to recompense the TOC? And there's the moral minefield of short riding, passing on day tickets and so on.

I would say that this forum is not altogether passenger-friendly and far more ready to call travellers fraudsters than they are to call out the industry for their dubious practices, compared to the rest of the media and other travel advisors.

 

[Ferret]

I would say that this forum is not altogether passenger-friendly and far more ready to call travellers fraudsters than they are to call out the industry for their dubious practices, compared to the rest of the media and other travel advisors.

But then, some of the media have a responsibility to sell papers, and calling out the more nefarious elements of society for being thieves doesn't sell newspapers, but indulging in a bit of TOC-bashing every now and then seems to satisfy the baying masses.

 

[michael769]

Yes you should pay for your train fare but how much?

You should pay the fare agreed between yourself and the ToC. If you cannot reach agreement then you should seek travel from a competitor (such as a bus operator, taxi, plane or private car).

 

[jb]

I would say that this forum is not altogether passenger-friendly and far more ready to call travellers fraudsters than they are to call out the industry for their dubious practices, compared to the rest of the media and other travel advisors.

I think you mean "some posters will give Citizen Smithery the faint ridicule it deserves".

 

[Flamingo]

I would say that this forum is not altogether passenger-friendly and far more ready to call travellers fraudsters than they are to call out the industry for their dubious practices, compared to the rest of the media and other travel advisors.

Well, the forum is reflecting the views of it's members (the vast majority of whom are passengers, some of whom are very knowledgeable about the subject).

If it does not reflect your individual view, then maybe you need to do some soul- searching and either find a forum that does, or realise that maybe the reason the majority of members have a different view from you is that your views might need adjusting.

Just a thought...

 

[island]

I heartily recommend neilmc to try moneysavingexpert as a forum with his philosophy.

 

[Tibbs]

Well, the forum is reflecting the views of it's members (the vast majority of whom are passengers, some of whom are very knowledgeable about the subject).

If it does not reflect your individual view, then maybe you need to do some soul- searching and either find a forum that does, or realise that maybe the reason the majority of members have a different view from you is that your views might need adjusting.

Just a thought...

How boring this forum would be if everyone agreed on everything.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But then, some of the media have a responsibility to sell papers, and calling out the more nefarious elements of society for being thieves doesn't sell newspapers, but indulging in a bit of TOC-bashing every now and then seems to satisfy the baying masses.

Have you never read the Daily Mail? Aside from horror stories about the hordes of foreigners invading our shores, their whole circulation is basically reliant on whipping up a frenzy about the 'nefarious elements of society'. Oh, that and running a revolving door on foods that either cause or cure cancer. All the other papers are pretty much the same - this picture sums it up:

Seriously, if you've got the Daily Mail taking sides with scumbag fare evaders against you, you're doing something very very wrong. (and I'm talking about your approach, not your goal)

If your marketing / PR people were halfway competent there'd be headlines saying "TOC X TACKLES FERAL FARE EVADERS ON TRAINS!"

 

[Ferret]

Tibbs, would umpteen stories about faredodgers captivate the masses? Nope!

Does whipping up outrage over somebody being charged up by a big nasty ticket inspector sell newspapers and give the people what they want to read? It seems so. And so the cycle repeats, ad nauseum. It's nothing to do with the likes of the Mail taking sides; it's everything to do with a commercial organisation wishing to make money.

 

[Tibbs]

Tibbs, would umpteen stories about faredodgers captivate the masses? Nope!

Does whipping up outrage over somebody being charged up by a big nasty ticket inspector sell newspapers and give the people what they want to read? It seems so. And so the cycle repeats, ad nauseum. It's nothing to do with the likes of the Mail taking sides; it's everything to do with a commercial organisation wishing to make money.

No, but "Fare evader purge saves taxpayer £x" would probably work. It's about crafting an interesting story and being creative.

Though most people think it is, PR isn't a dirty word. Especially when I helps you do your job.

Given that a friend of mine managed to get positive stories about toilet paper into the newspapers, getting positive stories about rail companies shouldn't be too much harder.

 

[Ferret]

Of course, the flip side of what the Daily Mail et al write is that it tells some people that getting on a train without a valid ticket probably isn't a bright idea! Perhaps the saying regarding there being no such thing as bad publicity applies after all.

As regards PR for TOCs, for the main part, the BBC Documentary series I thought was, on the whole, positive for 'us'! That does at least prove your last point. As for the rest of what you had to say regarding the newspapers, I'm afraid I don't agree!

 

[glasgowguy1984]

As an individual who works with the public who are for the most part pretty stupid when in large crowds I have to say I find the cynical nature of this forum in general with regards to ticketing worrying.

People post on here for advice and as sure as the sun will set a post will come up inferring that they are lieing and the cynical nature of most posts is disturbing. If I spoke to customers with the tone of most RPI's and posters on here I'd earn myself a p45 quicker than the rail industry can call a strike. I'm not naive or dillusional but 'the customer is always right' yes I am aware they're probably wrong but that's neither he nor there. All customers should be treated with respect and not accused of criminality automatically otherwise your letting your ego get in the way of your job it's unprofessional and a good bol$%*king or a p45 is required.

 

[Flamingo]

I was going to say what a stupid post and how full of assumptions (and the authors own prejudices) it is, but then decided why bother :roll:

 

[jon0844]

As an individual who works with the public who are for the most part pretty stupid when in large crowds I have to say I find the cynical nature of this forum in general with regards to ticketing worrying.

People post on here for advice and as sure as the sun will set a post will come up inferring that they are lieing and the cynical nature of most posts is disturbing. If I spoke to customers with the tone of most RPI's and posters on here I'd earn myself a p45 quicker than the rail industry can call a strike. I'm not naive or dillusional but 'the customer is always right' yes I am aware they're probably wrong but that's neither he nor there. All customers should be treated with respect and not accused of criminality automatically otherwise your letting your ego get in the way of your job it's unprofessional and a good bol$%*king or a p45 is required.

What is your opinion on the person who colour copied a refunded season ticket and then stuck it to the front of another ticket and kept it in the ticket wallet for sentimental reasons? Sound truthful? Benefit of the doubt?

Some reasons, or excuses, seem rather unlikely and this is a forum for opinions so no P45s here. The posters are nearly always anonymous too so no harm there either.

There are many threads where people are believed and helped to most satisfactory conclusions. Many people are experts here and have heard everything before, as they have that valued benefit; real world experience.

 

[Ferret]

As an individual who works with the public who are for the most part pretty stupid....

If I spoke to customers with the tone of most RPI's and posters on here I'd earn myself a p45 quicker than the rail industry can call a strike. I'm not naive or dillusional but 'the customer is always right' yes I am aware they're probably wrong but that's neither he nor there. All customers should be treated with respect and not accused of criminality automatically otherwise your letting your ego get in the way of your job it's unprofessional and a good bol$%*king or a p45 is required.

Priceless! Is there an award for post of the week? If not, there should be!

 

[island]

As an individual who works with the public who are for the most part pretty stupid when in large crowds I have to say I find the cynical nature of this forum in general with regards to ticketing worrying.

People post on here for advice and as sure as the sun will set a post will come up inferring that they are lieing and the cynical nature of most posts is disturbing. If I spoke to customers with the tone of most RPI's and posters on here I'd earn myself a p45 quicker than the rail industry can call a strike. I'm not naive or dillusional but 'the customer is always right' yes I am aware they're probably wrong but that's neither he nor there. All customers should be treated with respect and not accused of criminality automatically otherwise your letting your ego get in the way of your job it's unprofessional and a good bol$%*king or a p45 is required.

I agree that customers should be treated with respect.

People who have not paid for the service they are using are not customers.

You can fill in the rest.

 

[neilmc]

Well I NEVER jump on a train without a ticket, or with one I know for a fact isn't valid for the train I'm catching - assuming there was a clear opportunity to buy one first, of course. And I always find the on-train staff courteous and helpful. Fortunately I almost always catch trains from large central stations with ticket offices so I "Don't Fear The Gripper"!

HOWEVER ... there has been one thread after another where an RPI has tried to get a ticketless passenger to incriminate themselves so I would be very worried, for example, if I found myself boarding at an unstaffed Northern station and the conductor failed to come round. Especially if I don't know the layout of the destination station.

And even on such a knowledgeable forum as this there's no clear cut agreement as to whether a Manchester-Southport ticket is valid via Liverpool - not exactly an obscure journey - so what chance does the average passenger have of deducing such a thing? An officious member of staff might pull out routing guides and suddenly decide that it isn't and what then? Are you, in the words of other worthy members, suddenly a non-customer or a fraudster? More than meets the eye, people.

 

[Flamingo]

from my (extensive) experience, there is no need to go to any subterfuge to get passengers travelling without tickets to incriminate themselves - they do that the minute they open their mouth.

The most common station I find passengers travelling without tickets from is Paddington. Most of them react with indignation when told they have committed an offence and are now liable to an appearance in the Magistrates Court and a fine not exceeding £1000. None of them ever have an excuse better than "The train was about to leave" (regardless of destination), usually followed by "I always buy tickets on the train". If I ask them the killer question ("If I hadn't come through, would you have boutgh a ticket"), the answer is usually a variation on the theme of "It's up to you to find me".

These are usually well dressed, well spoken seemingly intelligent people - bright enough to know they need a train ticket, and with no extenuating circumstances (except, being charitable, laziness) for not buying a ticket from A main terminus with a wide selection of opportunity to buy before boarding.

 

[island]

And did their trains happen to leave from platforms 1, 8, or 9 at Paddington by any chance?

 

[Flamingo]

Always!

 

[sheff1]

I agree that customers should be treated with respect.

People who have not paid for the service they are using are not customers.

You can fill in the rest.

I can only guess that you are implying that people who have not paid do not need to be treated with respect. Even if that is not your intention, I know a number of people do hold that view.

Where then does that leave someone who has paid for the service they are using but an unknowledgeable ticket checker 'is sure' has not ? Is the ticket checker entitled to treat that non (in their eyes) customer with a lack of respect ? If they believe they are, that would explain a lot of things.

 

[Clip]

This thread has descended into something that you will see on mse,with dodgy 'facts' and opinion by those who think they know right,through their ideology of what they want and those who know and try their best to give the right information according to the rules.

I love a bit of dicussion surrounding ticketing issues and maybe train lenghts and over crowding, but come on. Please.

 

[Tibbs]

This thread has descended into something that you will see on mse,with dodgy 'facts' and opinion by those who think they know right,through their ideology of what they want and those who know and try their best to give the right information according to the rules.

I love a bit of dicussion surrounding ticketing issues and maybe train lenghts and over crowding, but come on. Please.

So you've made a post with no 'facts' complaining about posts with no facts? OMG - forum-ception.

By all means disagree with peoples' opinions, but they're no less valid than yours, because, hey, that's how opinions work.

However, please feel free to use facts of your own to argue against the 'factless' posts. Or, y'know - quit whining.