• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Are fine consequences too overkill?

ATS3

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2024
Messages
11
Location
London
Are fines on the UK railways too overkill? It feels like they're far far too strict, especially when you read stories on here about people being fined/prosecuted for simple things such as railcards not being available due to wifi or phone battery dying and other trivial matters.
I mean it doesn't exactly send a positive welcoming message to potential people who may want to travel by rail when you could get a full criminal record for failing to buy the correct ticket?
I understand that fare evasion is a big issue, and that going hard like this logically would hamper it, but really should it not be hard for repeat offenders rather than the odd individual who has made a mistake or isn't well accustomed to the UK railway?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,404
Location
Bolton
There's an easy way around it, which is to prevent people who don't have the correct ticket from boarding the train. See Colchester as an example where an extra check at the platform often happens, or London Euston where there's often a manual check for Avanti West Coast services instead of ticket gates. Sometimes evening services from York, Nottingham or Birmingham New Street are boarded through just one door in aid of this manual check, but it requires a lot of staff - even if you could argue it's just the staff that should be provided anyway.

The downside for the operators to this approach is that preventing people from committing the offence usually results in their clearing off or paying the correct fare, which is vastly less lucrative than issuing a Penalty Fare or making a report of an offence.
 

ATS3

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2024
Messages
11
Location
London
There's an easy way around it, which is to prevent people who don't have the correct ticket from boarding the train. See Colchester as an example where an extra check at the platform often happens, or London Euston where there's often a manual check for Avanti West Coast services instead of ticket gates.

The downside for the operators to this approach is that preventing people from committing the offence usually results in their clearing off or paying the correct fare, which is vastly less lucrative than issuing a Penalty Fare or making a report of an offence.
Of course, but for smaller stations with no one at gateline that connect to larger ones that go into ones with gateline staff, its a easy trap to fall into especially when theres no one to warn you like you say. Is it perhaps time to put the foot down on this with TOCs potentially coming into public ownership under Labour?
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,404
Location
Bolton
Of course, but for smaller stations with no one at gateline, its a easy trap to fall into especially when theres no one to warn you like you say. Is it perhaps time to stop down on this with TOCs potentially coming into public ownership under Labour?
Yes, that wouldn't work everywhere, and by definition not optimised both ways around on a journey. It would be workable at one end of nearly all journeys, but that still doesn't capture most people who start at a secondary or minor station.
 

Skymonster

Established Member
Joined
7 Feb 2012
Messages
1,747
I believe there has to be a punitive element to charges made when a customer fails to comply with the regulations or terms of their “contract” with the railway. If such was not the case, far more people would try it on, safe in the knowledge that at least on the first occasion the financial damage to themselves would only be the fare not paid. So yes, it is the customer’s responsibility to ensure their railcard is valid and they comply with the terms of their ticket, etc - albeit that Trainline et al does not help by failing to enable safeguards and checks on digital ticket sales. And yes I think charging full anytime singles for each transgression, leveraging historic online sales records, is appropriate.

However, fare evasion could be reduced in some situations through more diligent checking [as described above]. By not undertaking full pre-boarding checks the industry should accept that customer non-compliance and subsequent investigation when detected is a normal cost of doing business, much as we all accept that policing is a normal cost in our society. And as such, the problem I have with current practice is the charges added on for investigations. The investigators are sitting in offices waiting for offence reports to cross their desks - or more accurately dealing with an ever-present pile of them - and are not recruited piecemeal as the number of irregularities ebb and flow. Thus their ongoing salary and other costs should come from overall industry revenue. Look at it this way: if someone commits non-railway crime and is ultimately found guilty, they don’t pay for the police investigation.

The other problem I have is that the overriding impression one could get being a reasonably well informed but external observer is that the offers to settle out of court sometimes seem to be bordering on extortion - that is: pay this much, which the train company doesn’t have to justify, or go to court where the train company will almost certainly win in most cases. This stinks, and while I support in principle the concept of out of court settlements - because genuine first-time mistakes should not result in a criminal record - in my opinion operators should be compelled to justify every penny of the amounts demanded to keep matters out of the formal judicial system.
 

Enthusiast

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,145
Look at it this way: if someone commits non-railway crime and is ultimately found guilty, they don’t pay for the police investigation.
True. But they do pay a contribution towards the cost of bringing the prosecution.
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,417
Location
Back office
Are fines on the UK railways too overkill? It feels like they're far far too strict, especially when you read stories on here about people being fined/prosecuted for simple things such as railcards not being available due to wifi or phone battery dying and other trivial matters.
I mean it doesn't exactly send a positive welcoming message to potential people who may want to travel by rail when you could get a full criminal record for failing to buy the correct ticket?
I understand that fare evasion is a big issue, and that going hard like this logically would hamper it, but really should it not be hard for repeat offenders rather than the odd individual who has made a mistake or isn't well accustomed to the UK railway?

The railway largely runs on honesty so how are people supposed to be discouraged against failing to buy a valid ticket without penalties?

There is a forgotten railcard policy in place which makes an allowance for genuine people who can’t present their railcard.

In fact the railway displays leniency in a lot of cases which favours the passenger and this is well underreported.

For “honest mistakes” there are various exemptions to penalty fare schemes where people just get upgraded to a valid ticket.

A lot of people will pay when challenged or intentionally not bother to get the ticket they need when they could have. A percentage of the population view discretion as an absolute entitlement and deliberately travel without a valid ticket on the basis that they ought to be shown discretion.

In general fare evasion is not seen as a crime or morally wrong which is why people are so surprised when they actually get into trouble. People that get done may well have been travelling illegitimately for some time and just had an unlucky day when written up.

To actually get done, in most cases people have been found bang to rights without a valid ticket when they could have had one - and had absolutely no plan for avoiding trouble.

There are ways to get the fare down legitimately that are unlikely to result in trouble.

The only people I really feel sympathy for is people who normally travel in a place where you pay on the train, then end up on a different part of the network where much stricter rules apply, as it’s a change from what is known.

Sorry but I am not really seeing things from the same perspective.
 
Last edited:

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,508
Location
UK
Are fines on the UK railways too overkill?
Nope

It feels like they're far far too strict,

Not really. Only a small number of cases seem to end up in court and the plethora of penalty fares show that there is an element of leniency.


especially when you read stories on here about people being fined/prosecuted for simple things such as railcards not being available due to wifi or phone battery dying and other trivial matters.

The absence of any self responsibility shows how much culture plays an impact. Feel free to not go hard on railcard expiration but then accept that it becomes the default method to defraud the system.

I mean it doesn't exactly send a positive welcoming message to potential people who may want to travel by rail when you could get a full criminal record for failing to buy the correct ticket?

How many people really consider that as an option ? The majority of people just buy a ticket and never think about it.

I understand that fare evasion is a big issue, and that going hard like this logically would hamper it, but really should it not be hard for repeat offenders rather than the odd individual who has made a mistake or isn't well accustomed to the UK railway?

How many times am I allowed to get away with it ? Can I keep going till I get caught, declare that as my 'first time' and then chuckle with all the times I've gotten away with it ?

Ultimately the passenger suffers. Fares will increase to cover the costs. Feel free to support fare evasion and add the cost of other passenger tickets to yours.
 

FenMan

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2011
Messages
1,383
The train company very much has to be alert to account for the sum asked for in out of court settlements and, should there be errors of fact, to make appropriate changes.

To not do this may result in an unhappy outcome for the train company if it reaches court, something they'd very much want to avoid given the statutory privileges they enjoy.
 

Skymonster

Established Member
Joined
7 Feb 2012
Messages
1,747
From the railcard terms and conditions:
2.8. You must carry your valid Railcard with you on your journey. When asked by rail staff, you must show a valid ticket and valid Railcard within its period of validity when you travel.

People failing to read, understand and / or comply with the terms and conditions of the railcard they elect to buy are architects of their own undoing. Blaming or criticising the railway for enforcing them is naive at best, wantonly negligent in reality. Failing to take personal responsibility, and unwillingness to accept the consequences not doing so, is all too common these days.
 

ATS3

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2024
Messages
11
Location
London
Ultimately the passenger suffers. Fares will increase to cover the costs. Feel free to support fare evasion and add the cost of other passenger tickets to yours.
Why are you making such crude assumptions? I do not support fare evasion.
The absence of any self responsibility shows how much culture plays an impact. Feel free to not go hard on railcard expiration but then accept that it becomes the default method to defraud the system.
Easy fixable by issuing a warning system where details are taken down and no action is taken (for genuine mistakes only). And have railcards be registered under railcard numbers that have to be given or entered before authorizing the purchase which fixes that loophole.

From the railcard terms and conditions:


People failing to read, understand and / or comply with the terms and conditions of the railcard they elect to buy are architects of their own undoing. Blaming or criticising the railway for enforcing them is naive at best, wantonly negligent in reality. Failing to take personal responsibility, and unwillingness to accept the consequences not doing so, is all too common these days.
Oh I definitely agree, there is too much of you're at fault, not me sort of thing, but respectfully that wasn't what I was trying to talk about here. I'm going on more about the consequences, for genuine accidental or out of control issues. The user has still bought a railcard, it just should be easier to verify. Perhaps if a number was introduced or the railcard could be looked up with the backing of ID by a ticket inspector. Just a idea.

given the statutory privileges they enjoy
This is the truth that I feel many on here are avoiding. Since commenters here have steered the thread away from the original point, I just want to say that TOCs it seems have evolved to see fare evasion as some sort of free money machine, much like LTNs with absolutely no barriers and cameras to catch people focusing on the road, perhaps to cushion the blow on shareholders. There needs to be a middle ground here, why do the 1% fare evade? Is it because of living costs? Taking a hostile approach to fare evasion doesn't seem to be making the issue better. Has the supposed bump up to £100 actually made a difference?
 
Last edited:

etr221

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2018
Messages
1,058
Not really. Only a small number of cases seem to end up in court and the plethora of penalty fares show that there is an element of leniency.
Most people - for this sort of discussion - don't distinguish between fines and penalty fares, and regard them as the same
How many people really consider that as an option ? The majority of people just buy a ticket and never think about it.
That's what they want to do - just buy a ticket and travel. But...
  • The railway is both (a) large and complex (I will leave it to others to come up with which journey has the greatest number of options as to possible trains, and possible fares - and what the numbers are) and (b) unreliable - trains often do not run to time, or at all, ticket machines don't work, etc...
  • The railway to a large extent not only expects its passengers/customers to self serve - to buy a ticket which ever way is possible, and find the train going their way, and just board and alight correctly - but to self manage - to sort out which is the correct, best ticket to buy; and which is the right train to use.
And then it gets upset - to the point of prosecuting and penalty faring people - when it thinks they've got it wrong.

As I've said before, if an RPI/other enforcer - who is, or should be, trained, and know what should be - incorrectly issues a penalty fare, or launches prosecution - then they should face a disciplinary (and have to explain themselves) , and - potentially - dismissal. If this isn't considered acceptable, then something is badly wrong...

The RIA (Railway Industry Association) recently produced a report on future ticketing options, "Destination: Revenue Growth" (available here): one of the more revealing and damning comments over the current system was that National Rail's ticketing was untrusted (quote: "We aren't trusted...") - unlike that of TfL or (at least some) foreign railways.

And many threads in this forum demonstrate why...
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,508
Location
UK
Why are you making such crude assumptions? I do not support fare evasion.

Strict liability is important. Liability on a sliding scale is to accept a portion of the fare evasion.

Easy fixable by issuing a warning system where details are taken down and no action is taken (for genuine mistakes only). And have railcards be registered under railcard numbers that have to be given or entered before authorizing the purchase which fixes that loophole.

It's the systems fault then ?

How about we do the complete opposite. You must enter the Railcard every single time you buy a ticket. Details are never saved, no default options and the entire responsibility for Railcards is down to the user ?

The culture of having an app do everything for you and when you didn't check it properly is just lazy and ignorant. I read a thread once that went through and the steps you needed to go through to have the apps add the Railcard. This isn't "accidental" it's very deliberate and when it isn't, it's pure stupidity and laziness on behalf of the user. Take responsibility.

Irrespective of the above. Genuine errors are dealt with by way of penalty fares.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,404
Location
Bolton
From the railcard terms and conditions:


People failing to read, understand and / or comply with the terms and conditions of the railcard they elect to buy are architects of their own undoing. Blaming or criticising the railway for enforcing them is naive at best, wantonly negligent in reality. Failing to take personal responsibility, and unwillingness to accept the consequences not doing so, is all too common these days.
Ironically that's the one transgression which there is a right to have reversed retrospectively, though of course only on one occasion.
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
13,244
Are fines on the UK railways too overkill?
Before someone else points it out the railway doesn't fine anyone. Only a court can issue a fine as a punishment upon conviction. What the railway does offer in many cases is an out of court settlement.

Many people think that train operating companies shouldn't be allowed to offer out of court settlements and that every case of fare evasion should be dealt with in the Magistrates Court.

It feels like they're far far too strict, especially when you read stories on here about people being fined/prosecuted for simple things such as railcards not being available due to wifi or phone battery dying and other trivial matters.
What we see on here isn't really a reflection of what actually happens. If someone is shown discresion then they're not going to come on here and start a case about it in this section of the forum.

On the subject of railcards there is already a policy that allows a forgotten railcard to be produced once a year. One of the problems we often see on here is that many people whose phone has died or who have forgotten their railcard subsequently discover it's also out of date...

And have railcards be registered under railcard numbers that have to be given or entered before authorizing the purchase which fixes that loophole.
This subject has been done to death on here and it really isn't practical.

I purchased railcard discounted tickets three months ahead of travel for me and a friend. It made sense to purchase a Two Together Railcard because it would pay back on this one journey. I purchased the railcard on the morning of travel. Under your proposal I would need to be in possession of the railcard before I ourchased the tickets, thus losing three months validity. Is thsi really what you want?

I regularly purchase tickets for friends and family members. They are entitled to various different railcards. How would I be able to do this under your proposal?
 

ATS3

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2024
Messages
11
Location
London
How about we do the complete opposite. You must enter the Railcard every single time you buy a ticket. Details are never saved, no default options and the entire responsibility for Railcards is down to the user ?
Yes, that's literally what I was getting at.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,508
Location
UK
As I've said before, if an RPI/other enforcer - who is, or should be, trained, and know what should be - incorrectly issues a penalty fare, or launches prosecution - then they should face a disciplinary (and have to explain themselves) , and - potentially - dismissal. If this isn't considered acceptable, then something is badly wrong...

Passenger error is totally acceptable and should be lenient and understandable but staff should be hung drawn and quartered when dealing with the insane and overly complicated ticketing system ?

How many loopholes and odd ticketing regulations should staff be aware of ?

The forum tend to keep those hush hush but woe betide and member of staff who doesn't see the loophole or specific subsection, paragraph, sentence, RoRA, byelaw, policy, NRCoC. It works both ways.

Humans make errors. How we deal with that matters.
 

ATS3

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2024
Messages
11
Location
London
On the subject of railcards there is already a policy that allows a forgotten railcard to be produced once a year. One of the problems we often see on here is that many people whose phone has died or who have forgotten their railcard subsequently discover it's also out of date...
Sure, perhaps then records of railcards should be able to be pulled up by revenue, if such a situation occurs. A quick check of ID and if it comes up on the system with a face check then its clear.

I purchased railcard discounted tickets three months ahead of travel for me and a friend. It made sense to purchase a Two Together Railcard because it would pay back on this one journey. I purchased the railcard on the morning of travel. Under your proposal I would need to be in possession of the railcard before I ourchased the tickets, thus losing three months validity. Is thsi really what you want?

I regularly purchase tickets for friends and family members. They are entitled to various different railcards. How would I be able to do this under your proposal?
I think you missed the line at the end "just a idea". I wasn't necessary suggesting this was the best method forward, rather just getting everything on the table
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,404
Location
Bolton
Passenger error is totally acceptable and should be lenient and understandable but staff should be hung drawn and quartered when dealing with the insane and overly complicated ticketing system ?

How many loopholes and odd ticketing regulations should staff be aware of ?

The forum tend to keep those hush hush but woe betide and member of staff who doesn't see the loophole or specific subsection, paragraph, sentence, RoRA, byelaw, policy, NRCoC. It works both ways.

Humans make errors. How we deal with that matters.
If a human error affects a consumer - business transaction, the business loses out in nearly every situation because the law gives a bias towards the interest of the consumer. If a human error affects a business - business transaction the law doesn't treat them differently. That's simply the way it is, nothing to do with the railway, it's economy-wide. In certain respects, consumers have a favourable default position against businesses. If you don't like that, don't sell things to consumers, and things will be very different.
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
13,244
Sure, perhaps then records of railcards should be able to be pulled up by revenue, if such a situation occurs. A quick check of ID and if it comes up on the system with a face check then its clear.
How confident would you be that this database could be reliably accessed on a moving train, going through tunnels and areas of poor or no mobile reception. If I buy a railcard at a station how quickly would this database be updated? What ID am I required to carry and what happens if I don't have any on me?
 

ATS3

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2024
Messages
11
Location
London
How confident would you be that this database could be reliably accessed on a moving train, going through tunnels and areas of poor or no mobile reception
Confident, as ironically whoever authorised digital railcards thought that the connection was good enough to be available as a option to the masses.
If I buy a railcard at a station how quickly would this database be updated?
As quickly as practically possible.
How confident would you be that this database could be reliably accessed on a moving train, going through tunnels and areas of poor or no mobile reception. If I buy a railcard at a station how quickly would this database be updated? What ID am I required to carry and what happens if I don't have any on me?
Same ID for everything else. Driving license, CitizenCard heck even passport ect.
 

FenMan

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2011
Messages
1,383
How about we do the complete opposite. You must enter the Railcard every single time you buy a ticket. Details are never saved, no default options and the entire responsibility for Railcards is down to the user ?

Welcome to the GWR app! Yep, railcard details are needed every time when making a purchase, details are never saved and it's entirely my responsiibility for everything.

A far from great customer experience, but, after a quick look online to see if the service has collapsed again, I do value putting tickets on my GWR Touch card before setting off to the station. So the GWR app it is.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,277
Location
St Albans
Yes, that's literally what I was getting at.
So you support what @Hadders was saying i.e. that the option to buy a ticket in advance (up to 3 months before it's travel date when a bargain may be available), should be removed by your suggestion. Given that railcards are purchased to enble fare reductions, those that have them should keep those savings by learning to check their card's validity before travelling. Those that have smartphone tickets, it's even easier to provide themselves with a reminder, - put an alrm on the phone's claender when the card is issued.
For those that can't be bothered to check, and then blame everybody else when they get caught, there's the option of forgoing the discount, - nobody is forced to buy a railcard to travel.
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
13,244
Confident, as ironically whoever authorised digital railcards thought that the connection was good enough to be available as a option to the masses.
It's not a requirement for digital railcards to have a continuous internet connnection. There have been reports on here that certain providers of digital railcards are not adhering to this requirement which is totally wrong and should be dealt with by RDG.

I suggest using a reputable retailer when purchasing something like a digital railcard.

Same ID for everything else. Driving license, CitizenCard heck even passport ect.
So are you saying you want it to be a requirement to carry ID when travelling by train? I would be totally against this.
 

etr221

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2018
Messages
1,058
Passenger error is totally acceptable and should be lenient and understandable but staff should be hung drawn and quartered when dealing with the insane and overly complicated ticketing system ?
That is far more than I said - in either direction. If the ticketing system is "insane and overly complicated" then it's not fit for purpose.
How many loopholes and odd ticketing regulations should staff be aware of ?
When it comes into their area of enforcement, all of them. And they need to have the information and training so that they are.
The forum tend to keep those hush hush but woe betide and member of staff who doesn't see the loophole or specific subsection, paragraph, sentence, RoRA, byelaw, policy, NRCoC. It works both ways.

Humans make errors. How we deal with that matters.
Yes. Both ways. The railway puts up posters saying "no excuse" - that has to apply to staff, as well as passengers.

Another point I would make: at least to some extent, the railway chooses to sell tickets to people without checking that they qualify for them, by, e.g., having a railcard that will be valid at time of use, and then chooses to let them start their journeys without checking they have a valid ticket - and so, as a result of its choices, bears at least some responsibility if, later in their journey, they don't have one.
 
Last edited:

HurdyGurdy

Member
Joined
30 Aug 2023
Messages
287
Location
Bulbourne
Many people think that train operating companies shouldn't be allowed to offer out of court settlements and that every case of fare evasion should be dealt with in the Magistrates Court.

I think train companies should decide whether each case of fare evasion is one of recovering a debt (of unpaid fares), or prosecuting a criminal offence.

If it's the former, of course they should be able to seek an out of court settlement, with the backstop that if no settlement is reached they can take their money claim through the civil courts.

If it's the latter, as a prosecutor, the train company must apply the evidential tests for the appropriate charge and follow the prosecutors code, or in serious cases, refer it to the police.

Train companies should not be using the threat of criminal prosecution to leverage an out of court money settlement which far greater than the civil courts would award.
 

randyrippley

Established Member
Joined
21 Feb 2016
Messages
5,151
There's a simple answer to Railcard offences.

Get rid of railcards altogether. Then reduce the price of ALL tickets by ~20% (exact figure to be determined)
There could be a case of offering discounts where you have multiple people traveling together on one ticket

But if it was done, you'd remove an entire layer of complexity in admin with a resultant cost saving.
You'd make ticket machine sales easier.
Prices would be fairer and universal (and less arbitrary - why can a 30 year old get a pass but not a 31?)
You'd remove a whole class of fraud - and corresponding checks. And by definition save on court time and put a few revenue officers out of a job so saving on more costs
You'd eliminate electronic viewability problems with device-stored cards

The whole Railcard system seems to have outgrown itself, becoming a confusing mess. Get rid of it, save the cost, benefit from the simplification
 

Fermiboson

Member
Joined
7 Jan 2024
Messages
377
Location
Oxford/London/West Yorkshire
Without jumping into the surprising (but also unsurprising) vitriol that has emerged in this thread, it is possible for the railway to be too strict in some areas and not strict enough in others. And before anyone goes off, please don't go on about some sort of cultural superiority/inferiority.

British ticketing is complex, we all agree on that, and as with any complex and fragmented system, mistakes are bound to be made all the time - by either the customer or the provider. I myself have, in hindsight, broken some part of the NRCoT or Byelaws at least four times in my time here - all unintentionally, despite taking a much greater amount of interest in transportation and legal matters than your average passenger. You may point out that I am not prosecuted - that is a fair point, although I believe it comes more from a lack of enforcement than leniency on the whole.

This thread refers to penalty fares as a form of leniency. Penalty fare esque systems, with much better appeal mechanisms and less obscure requirements on both the passenger and operator (none of this pay before 21 days nonsense, none of the precise wordings of posters, etc) are standard across most of Europe and the world. Many of them are framed under byelaws, and are legally classed as an on the spot fine, but the effect is the same as a penalty fare. Pretty much nowhere else in the world will you be asked to pay 2k pounds after using an expired railcard once.

It is also true that on the forum, we suffer from selection bias, because people who have good experiences with the railways don't come on here to talk about it. Of the people who do come here, the vast majority have actually committed fare evasion. They may or may not receive disproportionate or extortionate punishments - and I suspect most serial fare evaders who get an OOC settlement don't feel it is disproportionate compared to the magnitude of the crime they have committed - but they have knowingly committed a crime, and many of them do also seek to hide things even after the fact. It is also true that fare evasion is very, very rife - a disappointing number of people of my age, for example, commit some form of fare evasion (although within my social circles, I have been able to use this forum to demonstrate why it never works out). I spoke with a WM train guard the other day on a late night train, and he expressed the sentiment that he could do nothing about a number of very obvious adults asking for child tickets on board despite boarding from a station with TVMs, because the TOC did not have the manpower and resources to have RPIs, and he was happy "just to get something or anything out of them" every night. A simple headcount showed that WM was likely losing maybe a thousand pounds per night on that train alone. I'm sure many TOC employees on the forum will be able to share similar stories.

On the other hand, just because the system catches mostly thieves and there remains more thieves to be caught does not mean it is automatically correct to catch more thieves. Society does not operate on a linear scale.

There exist miscarriages of justice. Many guards, RPIs or even entire prosecutions departments appear to be poorly trained, and they let off the wrong people and go after the wrong people. We've had discussions before about how violent or intimidating individuals will be able to get away while vulnerable groups are more susceptible to be checked. TOC staff, like all humans, suffer from implicit bias - I've had ticketline staff stare at my rover for a full minute while absentmindedly letting several respectable suit-wearing white men through the barrier without even checking their tickets, then asking "how did you find out how to buy rovers?" - and even when caught, rich fare evaders (undoubtedly the kind that needs the strongest penalties as deterrent) can be confident of an out of court settlement, with lawyers to help them with gaps in knowledge when necessary, even when the fare evasion is industrial. I suspect many poorer people will not realise what is going on, get thrown in a panic at the scary big number, and plead "take pity" to the courts. That's the first reaction of many forum posters as well. Tourists and immigrants are most often caught out, and their behaviour annoyingly often matches that of the typical industrial fare evader - feigning ignorance, weird addresses, lack of willingness to interact with TOC staff and lack of ability to communicate clearly, etc. Leniencies mentioned upthread, like penalty fares (if that could even be considered a leniency), forgotten railcard policies, and excesses often seem to be applied arbitrarily, with some TOC staff on the forum even explicitly stating that they will not use these "statutory" leniencies (helmet - they will have their own good reasons and frontline experience, but this demonstrates just how non-uniform enforcement is and from the customer point of view can lead to unpleasant surprises). We've had examples of staff, especially contractors, simply being downright wrong, and then the prosecutions department also being wrong.

This does definitely put people off rail travel. It is one of the greatest difficulties I encounter when explaining Britain's rail transport system to immigrant communities - more than off-peak restrictions which LNER thinks so complex, more than split fares and routeing guides, it is the fear that one day they will get on the 1418 on platform 13 rather than the 1419 on platform 14 and get landed with a 150 pound bill that makes immigrants go "nah, I'll take the coach" (especially b/c of their vulnerable status to legal trouble). It is the reason that I always split with flexible fares or even rovers wherever remotely practicable.

There are flaws to the system where enforcement and deterrence is clearly not working. There are also flaws to the system where innocents or the ignorant are punitised heavily, leaving a sense of being ripped off, especially when it is common knowledge that so mnay people get away with fare evasion. Any discussion about fixing the system, and making railway legislation farer, needs to address both issues.
 

m0ffy

Member
Joined
24 May 2022
Messages
57
Location
Leicestershire
As I’ve said elsewhere, no private company should have the ability to bring forward its own prosecutions. We have statutory bodies for that purpose, the railway should not be a special case.
Secondly, I can’t charge the TOC a punitive sum for no catering/short forming/cancelling/stopping short, so why should a private operator be able to charge a penalty fare?
 

Top