Are ticket barriers at one station an effective deterrent against fare evasion?

[Bletchleyite]

In these times when TOCs seem to be cutting back on staff, surely it would make sense to provide On Train Revenue staff on certain trains to collect the fares. Might help encourage people to start buying before they board.

Notably Northern do provide an ATE (or whatever they're called now, grade-wise it's probably a second guard) on the Hope Valley.

 

[Clip]

children with tickets should not be prevented from catching the train.

No one with a ticket should be be they a child or an adult - however as we are not in full knolwledge of the facts we cant ascertain for sure if the kids with tickets turned up rather late for the train in question so its hard to judge anything.

Ticket checks are essential

 

[Llanigraham]

Nothing surprises me about Northern. The franchise is beyond help.

However they're kids without tickets. What to do exactly with unruly kids without tickets on the railways has always been a problem as the legal system isn't appropriate to deal with them.

However blockading them all, even those with tickets, clearly isn't the correct form of action. If something happens to a child because they miss their train then Northern and Arriva have a PR disaster on their hands. That's part of the problem with Arriva Northern - they are extremely unwise and exercise very poor judgement time and time again.

I'd be horrified if one my children was held up or missed their train because they were effectively against their will.

But as I pointed out earlier with a quote from the article, many of them them choose to wait for the next train so they could travel together.
See the last couple of sentences in the quote.

 

[Gareth Marston]

But as I pointed out earlier with a quote from the article, many of them them choose to wait for the next train so they could travel together.
See the last couple of sentences in the quote.

As soon as "Northern" appeared it got an auto response. I'm sure if there was an article about Northern helping old ladies with their shopping and handing out £500.00 in cash to strangers no questions asked you'd get the same!

 

[Bletchleyite]

As soon as "Northern" appeared it got an auto response. I'm sure if there was an article about Northern helping old ladies with their shopping and handing out £500.00 in cash to strangers no questions asked you'd get the same!

Another thing worth bearing in mind is that on receipt of a telling off from their parents, the kids who willingly stayed behind probably came up with some sort of fib as to why rather than that they chose to stay with their mates.

Personally I don't see why I'd be outraged, though I do think it's a bit rubbish if any did miss the train through non-deliberately being in the wrong queue. Ulverston is a safe little town, nothing is going to happen to them if they have to sit on a station (covered in CCTV) for an extra hour. And as they're up North I'm sure they'll have their big coat if it was a day where that was necessary, so no need to worry about being a bit chilly, either.

I'm sure my Mum worried on the quiet (parents do that), but if I got home from school half an hour or even an hour late in Ormskirk (a very similar type of place) the assumption would just be that there was a train problem, and the outrage bus wouldn't be waiting outside the station for passengers.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Another thing worth bearing in mind is that on receipt of a telling off from their parents, the kids who willingly stayed behind probably came up with some sort of fib as to why rather than that they chose to stay with their mates.

Personally I don't see why I'd be outraged, though I do think it's a bit rubbish if any did miss the train through non-deliberately being in the wrong queue. Ulverston is a safe little town, nothing is going to happen to them if they have to sit on a station (covered in CCTV) for an extra hour. And as they're up North I'm sure they'll have their big coat if it was a day where that was necessary, so no need to worry about being a bit chilly, either.

I'm sure my Mum worried on the quiet (parents do that), but if I got home from school half an hour or even an hour late in Ormskirk (a very similar type of place) the assumption would just be that there was a train problem, and the outrage bus wouldn't be waiting outside the station for passengers.

With it being in the media - the ones who told a fib or little white lie as to why they were late home are more likely to get a good grilling from responsible parents.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With it being in the media - the ones who told a fib or little white lie as to why they were late home are more likely to get a good grilling from responsible parents.

I'm not a parent (which some people seem to think annuls any view on this kind of thing, but anyway) but with my Scouts I've always taken the line that if they do something wrong that's one thing, but if they lie about it that is several orders of magnitude more serious.

 

[pt_mad]

However they're kids without tickets. What to do exactly with unruly kids without tickets on the railways has always been a problem as the legal system isn't appropriate to deal with them.

However blockading them all, even those with tickets, clearly isn't the correct form of action. If something happens to a child because they miss their train then Northern and Arriva have a PR disaster on their hands. That's part of the problem with Arriva Northern - they are extremely unwise and exercise very poor judgement time and time again.

I'd be horrified if one my children was held up or missed their train because they were effectively against their will.

Fair point. It's the fine line between fare evading and any duty of care the railway has to a minor.
Can someone 15 or under knowingly evade a fair and break the law? They are criminally responsible over 10 I think? But at the same time, any guard who say, ordered them off a train at some village halt with no help could expect a backlash. Yet that is done with adults at times.

There surely has to be a process to issue unpaid fare notices for example when it's a child, without ID.

Equally i remember a story once where a lady and her child in a pushchair were asked to leave a train at some quiet station due to ticket less . The media sideed with the passenger as they were vulnerable. Rightly or wrongly.

 

[yorkie]

Seems like some decided to hang around with friends when they could have traveled- this is typical behavior in teens to stay with mates no one made them do it. Northern kept staff on hand at Ulverston till the next train- clearly the safeguarding element had been thought about.

Another disappointing nonsense post that demonstrates a lack of understanding.

I know kids who have to collect siblings from primary schools, or who are instructed to stay with a sibling/friend and travel together.

And yes arrangements for journeys to school could be very different to going from school.

If Northern did not realise this would be a PR disaster and/or cause safeguarding issues, then they really aren't very bright.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Another disappointing nonsense post that demonstrates a lack of understanding.

I know kids who have to collect siblings from primary schools, or who are instructed to stay with a sibling/friend and travel together.

And yes arrangements for journeys to school could be very different to going from school.

If Northern did not realise this would be a PR disaster and/or cause safeguarding issues, then they really aren't very bright.

I'm a qualified teacher and have worked with vulnerable adults and children so i base my observations on past professional experience and training. Im also a father and now a grandfather and can remember being a child myself who commutted several miles a day by public transport for several years.

I'm not going to apologise because my observations on child peer group behaviour does not fit in with the "everything Northern do is wrong agenda" real life is not that clear cut and black and white.

 

[yorkie]

I'm a qualified teacher and have worked with vulnerable adults and children so i base my observations on past professional experience and training. Im also a father and now a grandfather and can remember being a child myself who commutted several miles a day by public transport for several years.

I'm not going to apologise because my observations on child peer group behaviour does not fit in with the "everything Northern do is wrong agenda" real life is not that clear cut and black and white.

So you are denying that kids may have to travel with a sibling/friend and you are denying they may be on their way to pick up younger siblings from a primary school?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If Northern did not realise this would be a PR disaster and/or cause safeguarding issues, then they really aren't very bright.

The only place it causes a genuine safeguarding issue to leave a load of teenagers (not one on their own), a fair few of whom will be adult-sized and capable of taking on any errant adult easily, to wait for one hour in a CCTV-covered railway station with staff present on site in a small, safe south Lakeland town at 4pm is in the eyes of the "Safeguarding industry" which likes to make problems out of things that are not problems.

To me, it's nothing more than a bit rubbish. It's quite low in the scale of the bad things that Northern do as a TOC all the time. 30 years ago nobody would have even batted an eyelid at it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Equally i remember a story once where a lady and her child in a pushchair were asked to leave a train at some quiet station due to ticket less . The media sideed with the passenger as they were vulnerable. Rightly or wrongly.

FWIW, I'm on the side of personal responsibility. If you don't want putting off the train, pay your fare. Or if you can't afford to travel, don't, or use one of the systems in place for someone else to purchase a ticket for you before attempting to board.

Children who take their fare money and spend it on sweets need to learn somehow that that is basically theft or fraud against their parents as well as a criminal offence against the railway. An hour's additional wait in a safe environment while the situation is sorted out or their parents drive over to collect seems a perfectly reasonable sanction.

 

[Llanigraham]

So you are denying that kids may have to travel with a sibling/friend and you are denying they may be on their way to pick up younger siblings from a primary school?

The wording in the earlier link says that some of them CHOSE to wait with their friends. Therefore they made a personal decision to do so. If they needed to be at a certain place to do something like collect younger siblings then I am sure they wouldn't have chosen to wait.
And from my experience primary schools have a finishing time before secondary schools and almost certainly not at "senior school plus public transport duration" time.

 

[Gareth Marston]

So you are denying that kids may have to travel with a sibling/friend and you are denying they may be on their way to pick up younger siblings from a primary school?

I think you"ll find that by the time the Ulverston high school child got back into Roose/ Barrow then walked to a primary school it would be signifacntly beyond the collect from the school gate time. Which means other arrangements will have to be made. The pricing structure of after school clubs is usually a flat rate so financially it makes little difference what time your child is picked up from them. Big sister or brother rushing off the train to collect a younger sibling seems highly unlikely.

In fact if you were relying on an older sibling to collect younger ones after school it's unlikely you would be letting them go to Ulverston and funding it.

 

[pt_mad]

I'm not sure whether the relevant staff are given safeguarding training. I've not heard of it,and I'm not sure the average Jo would know a whole lot about safeguarding and the detail of what it involves.

The cautious method would of course to let the customer off in most circumstances to avoid any possible complaint or media (or social media) report. The problem with this being, that ain't gonna make the railway pay, and rules will have to be enforced somewhere. And I doubt that anyone at all would be happy being penalty fared or given an unpaid fare notices, made to purchase a ticket which delayed them, or refused travel. I sometimes wonder how many complaints the revenue departments must actually hear of. Presumably there must be tonnes? The whole task seems to revolve around unavoidable conflict.

 

[sheff1]

I still don't understand why the revenue block was in the afternoon rather than when the pupils arrived in the morning. That way, there would have been no question of anyone missing the train home because they were in a queue to buy tickets.

If the numbers involved are significant, and in view of the lack of ticket buying facilities at the origin station(s) and (probably) on board, ticket sellers could even be a daily feature at Ulverston.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the numbers involved are significant, and in view of the lack of ticket buying facilities at the origin station(s) and (probably) on board, ticket sellers could even be a daily feature at Ulverston.

Or get the TVMs put in at all stations to Barrow and implement a PF scheme. If it starts costing the fare dodgers £20 a day they will soon change their practice.

 

[Killingworth]

I have a grandson who gets two GA trains to school. When he started I gather he got advice on travel from the school. His father was fortunate to be able to afford a scholars annual season ticket. No issue with misusing ticket money, or queuing to buy tickets. He travels with others who consider this as normal.

I've heard of similar problems with masses of schoolchildren in Northernland. Sounds like this has been brewing for some time where kids have relied on numbers to avoid paying in many locations . It's hard when they get pulled up for the first time but there are many ways to pay to avoid penalties. Those paying for a single on the return trip must be suspected of trying to avoid payment. Seems Northern need to work with schools to arrange the promotion of special Scholars Season tickets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seems Northern need to work with schools to arrange the promotion of special Scholars Season tickets.

Even regular ones would be sensible if the parents want to stop the money being spent on sweets. This problem is not new - you'd see it every day taking Merseyrail to/from school in the 90s.

The other side of it is if you allow kids to get away with fare dodging in their teens, they'll consider it normal as adults, too.

It needs a very hard crackdown. I think a TVM at Roose would be very worthwhile, then at the Ulverston end do a station block, which would "conveniently" only have one person selling tickets such that it could be ensured that at least some of them would end up late for school and so punished a second time.

 

[Killingworth]

Notably Northern do provide an ATE (or whatever they're called now, grade-wise it's probably a second guard) on the Hope Valley.

It took them a long time for the messages passengers had been feeding back for that to happen. It didn't happen last time I used a 2 unit train in November.

Edit:, Dunno how that happened, seems to have added comment to wrong thread

 

[Bletchleyite]

It took them a long time for the messages passengers had been feeding back for that to happen. It didn't happen last time I used a 2 unit train in November.

The one time I used it recently (a 2-car Class 150) it did have one in addition to the guard, and plenty of business was being done.

 

[yorkie]

I think you"ll find that by the time the Ulverston high school child got back into Roose/ Barrow then walked to a primary school it would be signifacntly beyond the collect from the school gate time.

Is it not possible that the younger sibling attends an after school club and that they are picked up from there?

Which means other arrangements will have to be made.

Northern have acted in a way that they knew would cause "other arrangements" to be made for a significant number of school children, seemingly without warning. I don't think they can possibly expect to avoid negative press by acting in this manner.

The pricing structure of after school clubs is usually a flat rate so financially it makes little difference what time your child is picked up from them. Big sister or brother rushing off the train to collect a younger sibling seems highly unlikely.

You can go on about likelihoods all you like but I know that all sorts of arrangements can and do happen, and to make assumptions that this inconvenience will not create any issues is unwise.

At least one parent felt unhappy enough to go to the press but we don't know what other inconveniences occurred. It was entirely foreseeable that this would backfire on Northern.

There are more appropriate ways and means they could have made their point.

I know passengers who have been mistreated very badly by Northern, so I don't trust them one bit. Managers were dismissive of the inconveniences caused and failed to understand the issue.

My knowledge of their failings in this area means that when presented with a conflict between a parent and a spokesperson for Northern, where clearly both cannot be entirely correct, I am inclined to believe the parent as at least I have no prior evidence of wrongdoing by that particular party.

If Northern want to be trusted they need to stop mistreating people and I have seen a lot of evidence of customers being mistreated by Northern.

They're a rotten company.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Is it not possible that the younger sibling attends an after school club and that they are picked up from there?

Northern have acted in a way that they knew would cause "other arrangements" to be made for a significant number of school children, seemingly without warning. I don't think they can possibly expect to avoid negative press by acting in this manner.

You can go on about likelihoods all you like but I know that all sorts of arrangements can and do happen, and to make assumptions that this inconvenience will not create any issues is unwise.

At least one parent felt unhappy enough to go to the press but we don't know what other inconveniences occurred. It was entirely foreseeable that this would backfire on Northern.

There are more appropriate ways and means they could have made their point.

I know passengers who have been mistreated very badly by Northern, so I don't trust them one bit. Managers were dismissive of the inconveniences caused and failed to understand the issue.

My knowledge of their failings in this area means that when presented with a conflict between a parent and a spokesperson for Northern, where clearly both cannot be entirely correct, I am inclined to believe the parent as at least I have no prior evidence of wrongdoing by that particular party.

If Northern want to be trusted they need to stop mistreating people and I have seen a lot of evidence of customers being mistreated by Northern.

They're a rotten company.

Taking the "Northern goggles" off what would your approach have been?

Its a fairly clear cut case of fare evasion which I assume you don't condone - you've just been too busy criticizing Northern and perhaps anyone who doesn't appear to hold your black and a white view of them. In this case fault is lying with the "customer" - a sizeable number of schoolchildren are not paying the fare or the correct fare between Barrow/Roose and Ulverston.

We have a number of sizeable flows of educational commuters on the Cambrian and the Marches but don't have this problem mainly as they all have season tickets and where the parents have to pay they do so. The school in Ulverston is clearly happy to accept pupils from outside its catchment area (school funding is based on headcount) so its in their interests to make it as easy as possible to get them to their campus - organizing educational season tickets with Northern for their pupils might be an option but at least they should be giving parents advice on the costs of purchasing season tickets v buying daily. As several posters have pointed out giving their children money to pay daily makes no sense financially.

 

[krus_aragon]

I still don't understand why the revenue block was in the afternoon rather than when the pupils arrived in the morning. That way, there would have been no question of anyone missing the train home because they were in a queue to buy tickets.

Northern might have had to get in contact with the school at some point to explain why a number of kids were late arriving, but that's a small matter. A greater issue is that in asking for payment at the end of a journey (leg), you're inviting kids to name a different origin station and short-fare.

Moreover, most high school kids would be kind of happy at being forced to miss lessons because railway staff kept them late. Making them lose their after-school free time is more of a deterrent. They're less likely to be able to hide the event from their parents that way around. And presumably the objective of this exercise was to get the school kids buying/carrying their tickets for every journey.

Good practice would have been for the railway to ask the school the week before to remind the kids to make sure they have their passes/tickets with them. (My local schools do this with bus passes: there tends to be a short amnesty at the beginning of the school year before drivers start sending kids back to reception at the end of the day. There's also a "temporary pass" system run by the school for kids who forget said passes.) The article doesn't mention one way or the other whether this was done.

I know from experience that most schoolchildren will conform with authority and join a queue when one is formed. (They're trained to do this on the schoolyard or outside the classroom from a young age.) Ideally a second member of staff should have been able to traverse the queue waving through those with tickets, while the first member of staff continued issuing tickets to those without. Having a single member of staff bellowing out instructions from the front is unlikely to cut it in most circumstances. (Again, the article is unclear as to whether this was done.)

@yorkie, you make a valid point that some ticket-holding students may have had an urgent need to catch that particular train in order to meet siblings. I'd hope that those with such responsibility would leave the queue and make themselves known to staff, but accept that won't always be the case. But given that those without means to buy a ticket were sent back to school, and those that couldn't board the first train were supervised by a member of staff until the next train came, I fail to see significant safeguarding issues.

There's room for improvement in how the blockade was done (for the sake of Northern's image if no other), but I wouldn't go as far as to say that they were wrong to do it in the first place.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If Northern want to be trusted they need to stop mistreating people and I have seen a lot of evidence of customers being mistreated by Northern.

They're a rotten company.

I absolutely agree with this - but in this specific instance I don't think what they did was all that bad at all. The child fare-dodging epidemic needs to stop, and by making things awkward for both the child and parent on a regular basis this might just happen.

At least some parents will know full well their kid is doing this, and some might even be involved wilfully. If they don't know about it, they have their head in a bucket of sand, as fare-dodging to spend on sweets has been epidemic for years. If they know about it and don't act by purchasing a season ticket, which completely solves it (a weekly if they're concerned about it being lost - and it's within "pocket money" type sums so the child can pay for it if they lose it), well, I hope they enjoy the inconvenience to their day.

There is one simple way the parents can avoid this happening to their child - to purchase a season ticket for their journey, as all of them who make the journey daily should have (as it's cheaper than singles or returns at that point).

I assume the SDR is regulated? If not Northern could whack it up a bit (and add a CDR which would be no use to schoolkids) - a work commuter will use a season, so the kids are about the only ones it would affect. That would provide a further push towards season tickets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good practice would have been for the railway to ask the school the week before to remind the kids to make sure they have their passes/tickets with them

Do you reckon?

No, station blocks should absolutely not be announced. Not ever, under any circumstances. You want to catch people out so they change to believing nasty things could happen (a) at random, and (b) enough times that fare dodging is not worthwhile, and if you warn them first they'll just pay for that week.

Similarly I wouldn't tip the school off - let the fare dodgers have the embarrassment and potential additional punishment (which they would then have to explain to their parents if it was a detention or similar) as further leverage.

It has to stop. We are not talking about vulnerable snowflakes - if you think a 2018 teenager is a vulnerable snowflake in this sort of regard you really need to meet one and talk to them. We are, in the case of those who have not paid their fare, basically talking about little criminals, because that is the correct way to describe someone who lies to their parents about what the money they are asking for is for (fraud), and then wilfully avoid paying their train fare so as to spend it on sweets (RoRA offence).

The railway is not a childcare organisation. Treat them like you would fare-dodging adults (though probably the vulnerable end of adults - so treat them exactly the same you would as a slightly built woman in her 20s, say). If the parents don't like that, perhaps they should consider a different method of transport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's also a "temporary pass" system run by the school for kids who forget said passes.

Why?

Forget your pass, pay a fare. Don't do either, don't travel and have to explain to your parents why they have to pay for a taxi for you or to the school why you didn't attend that day and take the punishment.

We need to breed personal responsibility. No ticket, no travel, simple as that, no question. The reason does not matter. Not dealing with this at a young age leads to the huge adult fare dodging culture we have now.

@yorkie, you make a valid point that some ticket-holding students may have had an urgent need to catch that particular train in order to meet siblings.

Trains get delayed and cancelled, particularly long-distance ones like some of the Barrow line trains. This being the case, the parents are negligent if it would cause a safeguarding issue for the child not to arrive at a specific time.

Therefore, I can only conclude it actually only causes inconvenience - to the younger child's school in having to wait for the pickup, or to the parents to have to make other arrangements possibly at some cost either of lost wages, a taxi, having to give up another activity or whatever.

This being the case - sorry, no sympathy.

I'd hope that those with such responsibility would leave the queue and make themselves known to staff, but accept that won't always be the case. But given that those without means to buy a ticket were sent back to school, and those that couldn't board the first train were supervised by a member of staff until the next train came, I fail to see significant safeguarding issues.

Absolutely agreed.

There's room for improvement in how the blockade was done (for the sake of Northern's image if no other), but I wouldn't go as far as to say that they were wrong to do it in the first place.

I'd go so far as to say they were absolutely right to do it, and it should be done more often, until those who are not paying are doing as a matter of course. Indeed, it might well pay, if things are as bad as it seems, to return, for these stations, to the old-fashioned approach of a permanent station block every single day until they start seeing lots of season tickets which might indicate problem solved.

When I was going to school by train there was near always a ticket collector on arrival at Ormskirk, so those trying it on (i.e. those paying cash daily) only got away with it very rarely. Similarly, in the evening the ticket office staff at Aughton Park and Town Green would be out collecting tickets and fares off those arriving.

 

[Killingworth]

In fairness to parents, especially those living near unmanned stations, Northern don't make it easy to find and buy any scholars season tickets. Are they available? They need to be working with schools to promote these.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In fairness to parents, especially those living near unmanned stations, Northern don't make it easy to find and buy any scholars season tickets. Are they available? They need to be working with schools to promote these.

I have no idea, but for those travelling 5 days a week either in one direction or both a regular weekly season ticket is cheaper than daily singles or returns, and these can be purchased from Ulverston or Barrow, so obtaining one is not exactly hard. And loss is not that great an issue, as at £10.00 (from Roose to Ulverston) you just dock a week's pocket money to pay for it if it's lost (again building the child's personal responsibility).

If there is a scholar's ticket, then there is even less of a case for buying daily singles as the break-even point for that is no doubt 4 rather than 5 days.