Authorised person attempting to overrule another authorised person

[Fare-Cop]

And I see that you continue to talk in generalities, rather than addressing the specific points raised in this thread, editing out or failing to answer the specific questions asked, especially wrt a guards legal powers over passengers.

Before I upset all TOC employees, I do know 99% are lovely and sensible, but unfortunately as a passenger I have had a few bad experiences this year, the latest with Northern's untrained monkeys which are the subject of many complaints in another thread. Personally I'm fed up with TOCs/TOC employees/agents acting outside the law and/or being in breach of contract and I'm no longer prepared to sit supinely by as suggested in this thread, however unequal legal action may prove. If BTP are stupid enough to aid or abet illegal TOC actions, fine that's just more grist to the mill.

You asked the following question:

I'm certainly not getting into lengthy arguments here or discussing silly hypothetical arguments, but I'll repeat the points you haven't answered:
It was bb21 who raised the possibility of the BTP being called, I merely answered some of his questions. But yet again you've failed to answer my question. Are BTP untrained in the Byelaws? How can BTP take enforcement action under the byelaws if they are not aware of their provisions? I don't understand your point about the guard, surely the BTP are being called to deal with the passenger, who is also not breaching any bylaw and is seeing the railway break the contract between them?

This thread is about the validity of a ticket, a dispute between a traveller and a guard concerning that validity, whether another authorised person can overrule another and the likely outcome.

Unless an issue arises leading to an allegation of breach of National Railway Byelaw 6.1 (2005) any issue relating to validity of tickets in respect of the foregoing is covered by Byelaws 18 to 22 inclusive and the enforcement action to be taken, if any, will be dealt with by the TOC as explained in my response to your question.

If there is an allegation of bad behaviour by the guard, the detail of that allegation needs to be specified, it cannot be an allegation of breach of Byelaw in relation to ticket validity as the Guard is not the person using the ticket, and the matter will have to be investigated as the subject of a separate complaint to the TOC management.

I do not intend to respond on this thread further.

 

[BestWestern]

It does show though, that advice can change too. What is valid when you board can alter during the journey.

I think that would rather breach basic consumer law, you surely cannot agree a contract for a service and then subsequently vary it without agreeement from the other party?!

In this case, the Guard has IMHO handled the matter in a less than ideal manner. If it was identified or suspected that authority to travel had been granted erroneously, as long as it was accepted that it had indeed been granted, the Guard should have accepted the situation and allowed the passengers concerned to travel in accordance with the advice they had previously been given. Turfing already disrupted passengers off of a train they had been given permission to travel on is poor.

 

[najaB]

I think that would rather breach basic consumer law, you surely cannot agree a contract for a service and then subsequently vary it without agreeement from the other party?!

Well, the contract is for transportation between Point A and Point B and the original itinerary had already been changed due to the cancellation of the Northern train. Whether the advice that passengers were given formed the basis of a new contract is left as an exercise for the reader.

 

[Smidster]

This kind of situation would be where I think a rule of the finance industry would serve us well - That rule is that the consumer has a right to be treated fairly.

In this case it would seem clear that a passenger who has been informed that they are OK to travel and are then denied that at a later point are not being treated fairly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which again returns to my point. Permission in writing would be a valid ticket, whether issued correctly or not. The issue should then be taken up with the person who gave it incorrectly involving a bill to their TOC for Anytime Singles for the passengers concerned, and additional training/disciplinary action as appropriate to whether the issuer knew they should not have issued it or not. The same as any other incorrectly-issue but otherwise valid ticket.

IOW it's an internal issue, not a passenger one, and this would facilitate it being handled that way.

 

[rg177]

This reminds me of a XC guard having a slanging match with station staff at Leeds. The TPE to Newcastle had been cancelled so passengers had been told to catch the XC service.

Said guard was not happy at all and was refusing travel to anyone on TPE tickets, screaming down the platform at anyone who cancelled him.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This reminds me of a XC guard having a slanging match with station staff at Leeds. The TPE to Newcastle had been cancelled so passengers had been told to catch the XC service.

Said guard was not happy at all and was refusing travel to anyone on TPE tickets, screaming down the platform at anyone who cancelled him.

Some people just have anger issues. I can't see why it would matter that much to anyone. If he disagreed, he could have logged the names of the staff involved and made a formal complaint when he had a spare moment. Then TPE could have got billed for the additional passengers.

 

[Clip]

Some people just have anger issues. I can't see why it would matter that much to anyone. If he disagreed, he could have logged the names of the staff involved and made a formal complaint when he had a spare moment. Then TPE could have got billed for the additional passengers.

Doesn't sound like an anger issue it sounds like he was annoyed with staff who do not work for him and were further away from where he was, by his door panel, having to shout to make himself heard over the noise of the train and the station because they were not doing as asked.

And walking down to them to take their names would've caused delays not only to his service but those also booked at the platform just after.

 

[rg177]

Some people just have anger issues. I can't see why it would matter that much to anyone. If he disagreed, he could have logged the names of the staff involved and made a formal complaint when he had a spare moment. Then TPE could have got billed for the additional passengers.

In the end he gave in and let everyone on. Crew changed at York and the next guard wasn't bothered.

I was 16 at the time having just accidentally lost my ticket wallet containing tickets and railcard in Pontefract so the guard on the Northern service wrote on the back of blank stock authorising me travel back to Newcastle. He tried to refuse me as well 'because the next guard might say no' but again he let me on eventually and the next guard was more bothered about me getting back in one piece.

Someone was probably having a bad day.

 

[87 027]

Yesterday morning I was travelling on a TPE+connections advance from Bramhall to Newcastle but the connecting service (Northern) from Bramhall was cancelled due to the strike. I made my own way to Stockport by taxi and asked at the travel centre if I could use another operator's service to continue into Manchester. The travel centre verbally said yes but when I asked them to endorse my ticket or otherwise put it in writing, they declined and added that the other operator would probably just disregard it in any case. So I bought a new Any Permitted ticket into Manchester.

Asking staff to put things in writing is sometimes easier said than done!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd have just boarded a VT. Ticket checks on board are just about unknown between Stockport and Picc, and the ticket would most probably have operated barriers at Picc.

 

[87 027]

I'd have just boarded a VT. Ticket checks on board are just about unknown between Stockport and Picc, and the ticket would most probably have operated barriers at Picc.

Indeed there were no checks, but the point is that Stockport wouldn't put the authority in writing, thereby potentially placing me in a difficult situation, so I personally thought it was worth paying again to eliminate any possibility of further problems.