Big Stations with no Ticket Barriers

[island]

Not much at Wigan North Western but there are normally manual barriers at the bottom of the steps at Wigan Wallgate.

 

[N P Johnson]

Why don't people like ticket barriers?

(1) They exist for the benefit of the train operator, but are a great inconvenience to the passenger. They mean that you cannot board a train without a ticket, even if you intend to buy a ticket on board the train because (for whatever reason) you haven't had chance or time to buy one in advance. Consequently, it means everyone trying to board a train is treated as a potential fare dodger, and the train companies, who are happy to charge their customers a high price for the privilege of travelling, are not putting the interests of their paymasters first.

(2) Barriers tend to be associated with jobsworth officialdom and are an irritation, even for those with valid tickets, having to put down their luggage and fish out their ticket when they are in a hurry. They inevitably cause delays at busy times.

(3) Automated barriers have a habit of going wrong, and holding passengers up even where their ticket is valid, this means that they have to be staffed.

(4) They only guarantee that a passenger has paid a fare. There is no guarantee that the traveller will board the correct train (compare ticket checks at airports).

(5) They also mean that friends and familiy cannot accompany passengers to and from the platform, helping with luggage.

(6) They are potentially a danger, especially of the station has to be evacuated quicklly in the event of an emergency.

(7) They were widely scrapped in the latter days of British Rail, in order to make stations and rail travel more user friendly. It seems strange to reintroduce a concept that was abolished for a reason.

(8) They are a uniquely British concept. Barriers are rarely, if ever seen, in continental Europe. Yet other countries, too, must have problems with fare dodging. They simply have better methods of enforcement in the event of fare evasion. Or, as they are mostly still nationalised networks, it is perhaps felt that the inconvenience they cause to the honest traveller outweighs any potential benefits they might bring.

For what it's worth, I think they also create a negative image of our transport network for travellers arriving from abroad, for example to watch the Olympics, who are not used to them. Particularly odd is the concept that you have to have a ticket to to be allowed to leave the station, so that you can be physically detained if you have left it on the train, believing you no longer needed it, or have lost or mislaid it, having already paid. In a free country where you're presumed innocent until proven guilty, it seems strange that the train operators are even permitted to do this.

 

[GingerbreadMan]

Why don't people like ticket barriers?

(1) They exist for the benefit of the train operator, but are a great inconvenience to the passenger. They mean that you cannot board a train without a ticket, even if you intend to buy a ticket on board the train because (for whatever reason) you haven't had chance or time to buy one in advance. Consequently, it means everyone trying to board a train is treated as a potential fare dodger, and the train companies, who are happy to charge their customers a high price for the privilege of travelling, are not putting the interests of their paymasters first.

(2) Barriers tend to be associated with jobsworth officialdom and are an irritation, even for those with valid tickets, having to put down their luggage and fish out their ticket when they are in a hurry. They inevitably cause delays at busy times.

(3) Automated barriers have a habit of going wrong, and holding passengers up even where their ticket is valid, this means that they have to be staffed.

(4) They only guarantee that a passenger has paid a fare. There is no guarantee that the traveller will board the correct train (compare ticket checks at airports).

(5) They also mean that friends and familiy cannot accompany passengers to and from the platform, helping with luggage.

(6) They are potentially a danger, especially of the station has to be evacuated quicklly in the event of an emergency.

(7) They were widely scrapped in the latter days of British Rail, in order to make stations and rail travel more user friendly. It seems strange to reintroduce a concept that was abolished for a reason.

(8) They are a uniquely British concept. Barriers are rarely, if ever seen, in continental Europe. Yet other countries, too, must have problems with fare dodging. They simply have better methods of enforcement in the event of fare evasion. Or, as they are mostly still nationalised networks, it is perhaps felt that the inconvenience they cause to the honest traveller outweighs any potential benefits they might bring.

For what it's worth, I think they also create a negative image of our transport network for travellers arriving from abroad, for example to watch the Olympics, who are not used to them. Particularly odd is the concept that you have to have a ticket to to be allowed to leave the station, so that you can be physically detained if you have left it on the train, believing you no longer needed it, or have lost or mislaid it, having already paid. In a free country where you're presumed innocent uintil proven guilty, it seems strange that the train operators are even permitted to do this.

1) As you know, the National conditions of carriage state you need to buy before you board. These barriers simply enforce this. You could say that about anything that involves paying for something. If I go to Tesco for some food and don't have time to pay for it - can I just walk out?

2) Barriers when used correctly are much cheaper and faster than staff barrier equivilents.

3) Barriers are required to be staffed for legal reasons amongst other reasons.

4) This may be true for a barrier line at either that start or end station, but if you have to pass through barriers at both ends of your journey - your ticket needs to be correct for the majority of journeys.

5) True - however you could say the same about an airport or port! Your family can't go to the airline gate to wave you off!

6) This is why they are staffed. All barriers have an 'emergency open' button close to the control panel to allow for this. In many stations - they also open automatically in the event of a power failure or fire alarm.

7) BR scrapped the barrier idea due to a significant drop in passenger numbers and in order to maintain it's subsidies, it had to encourage more people onto the railway. Dpn't forget, BR's fares were being kept artificially low.

8) Having worked and lived in countires around the world - I can confirm nearly all civilised countries have them. Canada, France, Spain, Mexico, Orlando, New York to name but a few.

In terms of revenue, I read in a press release not so long ago that when they were introduced in Glasgow Central - they took an additional £30 000 in the first 2 days of operation.

Just like in a shop - theft increases the price everyone else pays to subsidise the loss! So it is in customer's interests that revenue protection measures are put in place. The barriers are the easiest and most effective way to enforce it.

 

[WestCoast]

Just like in a shop - theft increases the price everyone else pays to subsidise the loss! So it is in customer's interests that revenue protection measures are put in place. The barriers are the easiest and most effective way to enforce it.

Barriers aren't infallible though, very far from it. The crafty fare dodger will find a way to avoid paying the correct fare and barriers are (imo) absolutely not a substitute for checks by experienced railway staff - preferably on-train if this is feasible.

4) This may be true for a barrier line at either that start or end station, but if you have to pass through barriers at both ends of your journey - your ticket needs to be correct for the majority of journeys.

Not necessarily, travelling between A and B, you only need a ticket that will work the barriers at A and B. It doesn't have to cover the whole journey, you could buy the cheapest ticket to enter the system and the cheapest one to exit. Not to mention the possibility of buying child tickets, non-existent railcards - sure, you can set the barriers to reject them, but that may well frustrate a genuine user of these tickets and cause hold ups.

8) Having worked and lived in countires around the world - I can confirm nearly all civilised countries have them. Canada, France, Spain, Mexico, Orlando, New York to name but a few.

Britain is the only major rail network in the Western world that deploys them so extensively in a mainline rail setting though - you don't see them on 'national rail' in France or Spain, but you do on metro systems (where they are highly appropriate). Barriers are indeed absent from many continental networks, including in Belgium, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Poland, Czech Republic, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland, among others.

 

[Clip]

Im astonished that GingerbreadMan thinks that Orlando & New York are countries

 

[GingerbreadMan]

Im astonished that GingerbreadMan thinks that Orlando & New York are countries

Not countries but do employ different railway models to the rest of the US.

I am amazed at how some people still think human ticket checks are appropiate for every train journey in the UK.

They are not, the facts speak for themselves. No system is fool proof, but barriers at the current time are the only way we have. Maybe this will change in the future with developements of NFR or smartcards but I doubt it.

 

[lm321412]

Stansted Airport is another that springs to mind without barriers.

Birmingham New Street has a semi-permanent daytime barriers of London Midland RPIs

Oh please, don't call them RPIs, they are far far from it and are simply just "Ticket Collectors" - their salary per annum is around £10,000 less for starters per year and their knowledge of tickets and passes is absolutely useless. They have no concept of 'break of journey' or anything plus you could probably wave a matchbox at them and it would be seen as a legitimate ticket. I long wait for the day that barriers can be installed at Birmingham New Street.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Why don't people like ticket barriers?

Hear, hear for your big list.
It's like Tesco doing a bag search straight after you have paid for your goods and got a receipt, and then again in the car park.

I had a go on here about checks at Manchester Piccadilly (on the bridge).
When you arrive at the mainline platforms there is no check when you leave, so why bother at all?

Yesterday I bought a Cheshire Day Ranger at Chester.
No problems anywhere en route, except back at Chester the barrier rejected my ticket, involving a scrum through the manual gate (key jammed, staff not paying attention, people coming the other way etc).
How can a Cheshire Day Ranger not be valid at the station where it was bought?

Get rid of them.
Random checks, or on trains, no problem.

 

[WestCoast]

I am amazed at how some people still think human ticket checks are appropiate for every train journey in the UK.

They are not, the facts speak for themselves. No system is fool proof, but barriers at the current time are the only way we have. Maybe this will change in the future with developements of NFR or smartcards but I doubt it.

I am not against barriers per se, they have their place on certain routes and at certain stations. I just don't believe they are effective as some would like to believe.

Other highly intensive rail networks abroad run with low fare evasion rates without a single barrier and that's not because the users are more honest. It's about the regime of persuading and enabling the purchase of the correct ticket before boarding, plus effective checks on board supplemented by random inspections by groups of staff.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh please, don't call them RPIs, they are far far from it and are simply just "Ticket Collectors" - their salary per annum is around £10,000 less for starters per year and their knowledge of tickets and passes is absolutely useless. They have no concept of 'break of journey' or anything plus you could probably wave a matchbox at them and it would be seen as a legitimate ticket. I long wait for the day that barriers can be installed at Birmingham New Street.

It's just terminology at the end of the day, their job title will have been sexed up in some way or another. Barriers will probably be slower for you then, and may cause further delay if they are set to reject railcards if that applies. Barriers also have a habit of rejecting perfectly valid tickets, they rely on being encoded to accept the vast diversity of tickets that they can be presented with. At a busy station like New Street, don't be surprised if the barriers are set to accept everything when it's heaving either.

 

[GingerbreadMan]

I am not against barriers per se, they have their place on certain routes and at certain stations. I just don't believe they are effective as some would like to believe.

Other highly intensive rail networks abroad run with low fare evasion rates without a single barrier and that's not because the users are more honest. It's about the regime of persuading and enabling the purchase of the correct ticket before boarding, plus effective checks on board supplemented by random inspections by groups of staff.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It's just terminology at the end of the day, their job title will have been sexed up in some way or another. Barriers will probably be slower for you then, and may cause further delay if they are set to reject railcards if that applies. Barriers also have a habit of rejecting perfectly valid tickets, they rely on being encoded to accept the vast diversity of tickets that they can be presented with. At a busy station like New Street, don't be surprised if the barriers are set to accept everything when it's heaving either.

I agree! Barriers are not the ONE and ONLY way of stopping fare evasion. However I do agree that they are at the moment the best way we have in the UK at stopping oppertunist fare evasion.

We have such a wide ranging mix of railway 'systems' in place in the Uk ranging from Conductor's doing ticket checks on train, automatic barriers, human barriers, DOO trains, Oyster cards and obvious long and short rail journeys.

I personally believe we need to overhaul the UK's approach to rail ticketing. Starting with a much simplier fare system inline with other countries and secondly have a standardised approach to fare evasion rather than have *some* penalty fare areas, barriers, TI forms, court summons etc... dependant on where you are travelling to.

The punishment for fraudlent travel needs to be fair but harsh enough to deter people. For example when I was working in Tunisia, we saw someone claim he didn't need a ticket and was promptly arrested and taken away by the local police! Everyone else promptly paid up without a fuss.

In finally - educate people to Buy Before They Board. Most people think it's perfectly normal to walk past a TVM or booking office and buy on a train and don't know any different.

 

[N P Johnson]

1) As you know, the National conditions of carriage state you need to buy before you board. These barriers simply enforce this. You could say that about anything that involves paying for something. If I go to Tesco for some food and don't have time to pay for it - can I just walk out?

2) Barriers when used correctly are much cheaper and faster than staff barrier equivilents.

3) Barriers are required to be staffed for legal reasons amongst other reasons.

4) This may be true for a barrier line at either that start or end station, but if you have to pass through barriers at both ends of your journey - your ticket needs to be correct for the majority of journeys.

5) True - however you could say the same about an airport or port! Your family can't go to the airline gate to wave you off!

6) This is why they are staffed. All barriers have an 'emergency open' button close to the control panel to allow for this. In many stations - they also open automatically in the event of a power failure or fire alarm.

7) BR scrapped the barrier idea due to a significant drop in passenger numbers and in order to maintain it's subsidies, it had to encourage more people onto the railway. Dpn't forget, BR's fares were being kept artificially low.

8) Having worked and lived in countires around the world - I can confirm nearly all civilised countries have them. Canada, France, Spain, Mexico, Orlando, New York to name but a few.

In terms of revenue, I read in a press release not so long ago that when they were introduced in Glasgow Central - they took an additional £30 000 in the first 2 days of operation.

Just like in a shop - theft increases the price everyone else pays to subsidise the loss! So it is in customer's interests that revenue protection measures are put in place. The barriers are the easiest and most effective way to enforce it.

IN ANSWER TO YOUR POINTS:

(1) Of course it's normal practice to buy your ticket in advance, and the rules require you to do so. But there may be times, as I've said, when you've either lost or mislaid the ticket, or simply not had time to buy one, through no fault of your own, when your options are either paying on the train, or standing in a queue at the ticket office and missing it. Why should the innocent, but unfortunate, honest traveller be penalised in this way, because he/she is automatically treated as a fare dodger? That's what happens when you have ticket barriers. Many smaller stations are unmanned, so you have to pay the conductor. At open stations such as Sheffield, especially at rush hour, passengers often board local trains, and pay the conductor. It's not something most rail users would do from choice, because advance/discount fares are not available that way. And rightly so. But barriers totally remove that option. No ticket, you miss your train (and then maybe an onward connection, or a flight, whatever).

(2) and (3) You've said they have to be staffed anyway, so I don't quite see how they are cheaper than human barriers.

(4) Another user has already pointed out the fallibility of this. When you get to the barrier at the the end station, what's to stop you saying you've just got off a local train and the conductor didn't come round?

(5) But railway stations are not airports! Unless you're going on Eurostar, you're not leaving the country. We all know how unpleasant airports have become with all the rigorous, but necessary, security checks. They have them for a reason, because airlines run a peculiar risk. This is hardly true of trains, though, is it? How often do they get hijacked?
My view is that railways are a public service. They should be a pleasant experience to use. After all, you're paying enough. Instead they're being made an ordeal and an inconvenience.

(6) Even if you're right, the fact that they are there at all would make evacuation more cumbersome. Think about the Underground for example. It needs someone to press that emergency button. No dioubt they will need a key of some sort to do so.

(7) Actually I think I'm right in saying they were ditched in the early 1990s when passenger numbers had started to rise again. It would make sense to do so if it cut down on rush hour congestion. Personally I just think it made rail travel more user friendly. When did bus or tram stops have ticket barriers?

(8) I have travelled on the trains in France, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Croatia, and haven't come across ticket barriers anywhere else. If they're such a great idea, why does no other European country have them?
In Italy you are required to validate your ticket before boarding the train. Failure to do so can mean a hefty fine.

There may be odd occasions (perhaps such as major sports events/football games) where platform ticket checks are appropriate. But for the most part ticket checks should be carried out on board the train. You've mentioned a statistic from Glasgow. I don't know how accurate that is. But if rail travel is seen as an expensive inconvenience and an ordeal, many may choose to stick with their cars. Of course the system should pay its way, but for me, its main objective should not be to maximise profit, but to serve the public.

There's also an e-petition on this subject.

 

[GingerbreadMan]

IN ANSWER TO YOUR POINTS:

(1) Of course it's normal practice to buy your ticket in advance, and the rules require you to do so. But there may be times, as I've said, when you've either lost or mislaid the ticket, or simply not had time to buy one, through no fault of your own, when your options are either paying on the train, or standing in a queue at the ticket office and missing it. Why should the innocent, but unfortunate, honest traveller be penalised in this way, because he/she is automatically treated as a fare dodger? That's what happens when you have ticket barriers. Many smaller stations are unmanned, so you have to pay the conductor. At open stations such as Sheffield, especially at rush hour, passengers often board local trains, and pay the conductor. It's not something most rail users would do from choice, because advance/discount fares are not available that way. And rightly so. But barriers totally remove that option. No ticket, you miss your train (and then maybe an onward connection, or a flight, whatever).

(2) and (3) You've said they have to be staffed anyway, so I don't quite see how they are cheaper than human barriers.

(4) Another user has already pointed out the fallibility of this. When you get to the barrier at the the end station, what's to stop you saying you've just got off a local train and the conductor didn't come round?

(5) But railway stations are not airports! Unless you're going on Eurostar, you're not leaving the country. We all know how unpleasant airports have become with all the rigorous, but necessary, security checks. They have them for a reason, because airlines run a peculiar risk. This is hardly true of trains, though, is it? How often do they get hijacked?
My view is that railways are a public service. They should be a pleasant experience to use. After all, you're paying enough. Instead they're being made an ordeal and an inconvenience.

(6) Even if you're right, the fact that they are there at all would make evacuation more cumbersome. Think about the Underground for example. It needs someone to press that emergency button. No dioubt they will need a key of some sort to do so.

(7) Actually I think I'm right in saying they were ditched in the early 1990s when passenger numbers had started to rise again. It would make sense to do so if it cut down on rush hour congestion. Personally I just think it made rail travel more user friendly. When did bus or tram stops have ticket barriers?

(8) I have travelled on the trains in France, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Croatia, and haven't come across ticket barriers anywhere else. If they're such a great idea, why does no other European country have them?
In Italy you are required to validate your ticket before boarding the train. Failure to do so can mean a hefty fine.

There may be odd occasions (perhaps such as major sports events/football games) where platform ticket checks are appropriate. But for the most part ticket checks should be carried out on board the train. You've mentioned a statistic from Glasgow. I don't know how accurate that is. But if rail travel is seen as an expensive inconvenience and an ordeal, many may choose to stick with their cars. Of course the system should pay its way, but for me, its main objective should not be to maximise profit, but to serve the public.

There's also an e-petition on this subject.

I am not going to get into an arguement over something as trivial as 'whether auto-barriers' are a good idea or not.

The original thread was asking something totally different.

My ending thoughts on the subject are:

1) National Rail, TOC's and the Health and Safety Exec all agree that barriers are safe for use in mass transit public stations.

2) If they are that rubbish as you point out - why do companies insist on spending millions of pounds installing them. As a private coompany - why don't I just keep the money?

3) The DFT and Transport Scotland are now requiring barriers be installed at key stations for the next franchises.

I have no vested interest in barriers in terms of revenue, but all I can say is that they are here to stay. Where I like it or not, or you like it or not - they are being installed in more and more stations. If people simply buy before they boarded they would be redundant.

 

[N P Johnson]

Maybe. But this is where over-regulated Britain diverges so markedly from almost all its near neighbours. Company before customers, profit before passengers, security before service. Bring back British Rail!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Correct, no station operated by Virgin currently has automated ticket barriers.

And the only mandated new barriers in the upcoming WC franchise are at Birmingham New Street (after upgrade).
But they have to put in an ITSO card reading capability everywhere.

 

[paul1609]

There's possibly somebody from Southern on here more qualified than me to comment but my old Rail users Association were shown the tickets sales increases following the installation of ticket barriers at some stations in West Sussex,
I was amazed, more so when the barriers were often only in use at peak times. There is no doubt in my mind that they make commercial sense to the rail system as a whole, there was one station where the ticket income had risen by over £1/4 million a month!

 

[pemma]

The crafty fare dodger will find a way to avoid paying the correct fare and barriers are (imo) absolutely not a substitute for checks by experienced railway staff - preferably on-train if this is feasible.

Let's imagine Manchester Piccadilly had ticket barriers, the barriers would automatically accept a Manchester-Ardwick ticket, physical staff should not unless there was actually a train going to Ardwick.

Generally when ticket checks at made at Manchester Piccadilly, guards on Chester via Altrincham services do a first ticket check for all tickets on departure from Stockport. This means that if someone has a Manchester-Stockport ticket and tries to travel to Navigation Road then they are caught. However, it means that someone who had managed to get on an evening train with a Manchester-Ardwick ticket could get to Stockport without being caught. I would hope the G4S staff forming the barriers for platforms 10-14 don't automatically let people through with Ardwick tickets for that reason.

1) As you know, the National conditions of carriage state you need to buy before you board. These barriers simply enforce this. You could say that about anything that involves paying for something. If I go to Tesco for some food and don't have time to pay for it - can I just walk out?

I think you should read some of the other threads where that idea has been suggested.

2) Barriers when used correctly are much cheaper and faster than staff barrier equivilents.

Yesterday at Southport I tried to get out of the station with a non-standard ticket which the barriers wouldn't accept. I tried to show the ticket to the person manning the end gate, who three times told me to go to the barriers saying only people with cases are allowed through the manual gate, so yes automated barriers can be a nuisance for passengers who have a perfectly valid ticket.

 

[scrapy]

There are two main types of fare evader.

1) The person who goes all out to avoid paying the proper fare. This may include hiding in the toilet, buying 'short fare' tickets to get through barriers, buying child tickets to get through barriers, re-using used tickets they have found in bins.

2) People who ignore ticket purchasing facilities and sit in a part of the train where they are least likely to be checked (often the front as this is furthest from the guard). If the guard specifically asks them for a ticket, they will buy one but if they don't get checked then they feel it's the railways fault for not asking them for a ticket. If they get to their destination without encountering the guard, and there are no barriers they will leave the station (whether or not ticketing facilities are available). They will feel they have done nothing wrong and it is the railways fault for not asking them for a ticket. They do not consider themselves to be fare evaders.

There is also a third type of people who do not pay, those who do not have the opportunity to. Often this is because the guard is too busy selling tickets to those in the second type of fare evader category mentioned above.

Barriers will not stop the first type of fare evaders but will stop the second type (who probably make up at least 90% of fare evaders in non penalty fare areas). They will also give guards more chance to collect from those who boarded at unstaffed stations and to deal with those who deliberately try to beat the system.

 

[tsr]

There are two main types of fare evader.

1) The person who goes all out to avoid paying the proper fare. This may include hiding in the toilet, buying 'short fare' tickets to get through barriers, buying child tickets to get through barriers, re-using used tickets they have found in bins.

2) People who ignore ticket purchasing facilities and sit in a part of the train where they are least likely to be checked (often the front as this is furthest from the guard). If the guard specifically asks them for a ticket, they will buy one but if they don't get checked then they feel it's the railways fault for not asking them for a ticket. If they get to their destination without encountering the guard, and there are no barriers they will leave the station (whether or not ticketing facilities are available). They will feel they have done nothing wrong and it is the railways fault for not asking them for a ticket. They do not consider themselves to be fare evaders.

There is also a third type of people who do not pay, those who do not have the opportunity to. Often this is because the guard is too busy selling tickets to those in the second type of fare evader category mentioned above.

Barriers will not stop the first type of fare evaders but will stop the second type (who probably make up at least 90% of fare evaders in non penalty fare areas). They will also give guards more chance to collect from those who boarded at unstaffed stations and to deal with those who deliberately try to beat the system.

There is also a fourth type, which is, fortunately, irregular and generally infrequent: those passengers to whom the guard cannot be bothered to sell a ticket, and therefore they don't buy a ticket, since they have not been able to use their only opportunity to do so.

 

[exile]

There is also a fourth type, which is, fortunately, irregular and generally infrequent: those passengers to whom the guard cannot be bothered to sell a ticket, and therefore they don't buy a ticket, since they have not been able to use their only opportunity to do so.

Hmmm - all too common on my local service given the lack of ticket checks on board....

 

[N P Johnson]

One possible solution, as has been suggested previously, might be to revise the fare structure.
At the moment, there could be a carriage full of 20 people, all of whom have paid different fares for the same journey.
I take on board the point about having to have a valid ticket to board a train. Obviously, though, there are many smaller stations where there is no ticket office, so you have no choice but to pay the conductor.
So you have to have a ticket in advance if there's a ticket office at the station where you board the train, and if there's also a barrier, you can be prevented from boarding the train without one. But where there's no ticket office, you can only pay the conductor.
And often, especially on local services, passengers may have got on at different stops. Some with ticket offices and barriers, and some with neither.
Not really satisfactory.
Wouldn't a better system perhaps be this. Simplify the fare structure to have one fare where the traveller has bought a ticket in advance, and an inflated fare, say 25% more, where the passenger pays on the train. If it's local services where there's no ticket office, the passenger is usually not travelling far anyway. Without barriers, this would allow more options for ticket purchase, such as e-tickets bought online (common on the barrier-free continent).
Or, now that most people have debit/credit cards, why can't there be a card only ticket machine at all local stations?
Surely many fare dodgers would be discouraged from attempting it if they knew it would cost them more to pay the conductor if caught.
I prefer this kind of option to the crude nature of barriers. Innocent travellers without tickets in advance would not be prevented from travelling, although it would cost them more, and potential fare dodgers would at least be discouraged by the possibility of having to pay a higher fare.
I agree it's not perfect and it's not foolproof. But neither are ticket barriers. I just feel this kind of method might at least reduce some of the inconvenience that gating platforms causes to the innocent traveller.

 

[imagination]

London Paddington has no barriers for platforms 8 and 9. Does anyone know why? All the other platforms have them.

 

[142094]

Wouldn't a better system perhaps be this. Simplify the fare structure to have one fare where the traveller has bought a ticket in advance, and an inflated fare, say 25% more, where the passenger pays on the train. If it's local services where there's no ticket office, the passenger is usually not travelling far anyway. Without barriers, this would allow more options for ticket purchase, such as e-tickets bought online (common on the barrier-free continent).

A similar idea has been posted a few times, which is to have a sort of national railcard, which would give a certain discount on tickets bought before travel, and would be available to anyone to buy.

The same problem persists in that the vast majority of stations are unmanned and have no ticket machines.

 

[Central Trains]

London Paddington has no barriers for platforms 8 and 9. Does anyone know why? All the other platforms have them.

Neither does Platform 1 at the far right.

 

[tsr]

Hmmm - all too common on my local service given the lack of ticket checks on board....

I was being unclear. I meant you to picture the following scenario: the guard comes up to the person requiring the ticket, then gets asked for a single to a station a few stops down the line (assume, as would be correct in the cases I am thinking of, that the passenger is an honest person, and in fact an enthusiast, asking for the correct ticket and is not trying to pay a cheaper fare than prescribed). The guard shrugs his (or her) shoulders, tells the passenger that they don't really need to buy one, and walks off and reads the paper/fiddles with their hi-vis/operates the doors/whatever. After said number of stops, the passenger leaves through an unmanned and ungated station without a ticket. This is all because the guard could literally not be bothered to sell one.

I should point out that in all of the situations where I have heard of this scenario, the guard had their ticket machine with them and the train was not busy; the ticket required was cheap and easy to sell.

 

[David10]

London Paddington has no barriers for platforms 8 and 9. Does anyone know why? All the other platforms have them.

One platform needs to remain open to maintain a right of way with the Sheldon Square area. As this is the widest and also has the cycle park, makes sense it is this one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Neither does Platform 1 at the far right.

This is because until recently the taxi rank was adjacent to Platform 1 and was probably assessed as too narrow to partially partition like at London Victoria.

 

[Mojo]

London Paddington has no barriers for platforms 8 and 9. Does anyone know why? All the other platforms have them.

Neither does Platform 1 at the far right.

Platforms 1, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are unbarriered. 6 and 7 are for Heathrow Express services, and platform 8 provides access to the footbridge (for Hammersmith & Circle line and exit towards the canal). When the barriers were installed, work on the fourth span was ongoing and the space available would have prevented the barriers covering this platforms. Now the work is over and the hoardings removed, I suppose work could extend the barriers to platform 9, but cycle racks would have to be moved to allow a fence between the unbarriered platform 8 and platform 9. Given the legal wrangle with the City of Westminster over installation of cycle racks (Westminster told Network Rail to take them out due to Network Rail not obtaining the appropriate legal consent, and the replacement only having just gone back in), I doubt they're in a position to move them all again and then install a fence to block the gap back up.

 

[Welshman]

Yesterday I bought a Cheshire Day Ranger at Chester.
No problems anywhere en route, except back at Chester the barrier rejected my ticket, involving a scrum through the manual gate (key jammed, staff not paying attention, people coming the other way etc).
How can a Cheshire Day Ranger not be valid at the station where it was bought?

Chester's barriers seem to be set-up in a most peculiar way.

I was once seeing my wife off from there, and was sent to buy her ticket while she attended to a far greater need - a coffee from Costa.

On arrival at the barriers with her ticket, I asked if I could go through to carry her luggage over the bridge, and was told I'd have to buy a platform ticket. Back I went to rejoin the queue I'd left only 5 minute's earlier, and now considerably longer.

On arriving at the barriers a second time, clutching the required platform ticket, the barrier had to be opened by one of the gateline staff, as he told me that platform tickets don't work them!

You couldn't make it up.

 

[tsr]

Chester's barriers seem to be set-up in a most peculiar way.

I was once seeing my wife off from there, and was sent to buy her ticket while she attended to a far greater need - a coffee from Costa.

On arrival at the barriers with her ticket, I asked if I could go through to carry her luggage over the bridge, and was told I'd have to buy a platform ticket. Back I went to rejoin the queue I'd left only 5 minute's earlier, and now considerably longer.

On arriving at the barriers a second time, clutching the required platform ticket, the barrier had to be opened by one of the gateline staff, as he told me that platform tickets don't work them!

You couldn't make it up.

At one station (probably more than one, but I forget) I have, in the past, been through a gateline one way (exit), told by gateline staff to go to speak to a manager in a ticket office window, who himself told me to go to speak to the people beyond the gateline in the assistance window, which necessitated an explanation to the gateline staff, who then let me through manually the other way (entry), after having checked with the ticket office staff that I was "allowed" to re-enter... all to report a simple fault to the right person.

Confused? Welcome to the world of Southern, late on a quiet weekday evening...

 

[N P Johnson]

I was being unclear. I meant you to picture the following scenario: the guard comes up to the person requiring the ticket, then gets asked for a single to a station a few stops down the line (assume, as would be correct in the cases I am thinking of, that the passenger is an honest person, and in fact an enthusiast, asking for the correct ticket and is not trying to pay a cheaper fare than prescribed). The guard shrugs his (or her) shoulders, tells the passenger that they don't really need to buy one, and walks off and reads the paper/fiddles with their hi-vis/operates the doors/whatever. After said number of stops, the passenger leaves through an unmanned and ungated station without a ticket. This is all because the guard could literally not be bothered to sell one.

I should point out that in all of the situations where I have heard of this scenario, the guard had their ticket machine with them and the train was not busy; the ticket required was cheap and easy to sell.

If that's happening, it's for the train company to regulate their own staff, to make sure that fares are collected and, in the situation you describe, take disciplinary action against the official concerned. Sometimes there are plain clothes inspectors. That should keep nonchalent train guards on their toes.
The same principles apply to paytrains as to buses and trams.
It's hardly a justification for having ticket barriers at stations that the railway companies' own employees on board the trains are not doing their job.

 

[stevefreestone]

I heard it was due to dangerous congestion, because of the passenger flow and the backup of passengers at peak times towards the running lines trying to get out

Good grief, well the congestion at Kings Cross gets very dangerous at times. Serious congestion just to make sure that the inspectors have done their job - it's ridiculous.