Carnet ticket rejected

[TonyR]

I spoke too soon about Carnet tickets last week. Had a dispute today that I could do with help understanding as it needs more much more knowledge than I have.

Short story. Turned up at Cambridge station for the 13:15, dated a Carnet ticket across the face as I usually do, showed it to the gate staff as I always do (because as I've noted here before, the tickets won't work the gates at Cambridge "so the staff can check its been dated correctly".

On the train the ticket inspector comes through, takes my ticket, stared at it intently while moving it around and then declares the date boxes have been filled and erased and the ticket redated. Photo attached so you can decide yourselves whether it looks like this has been done. He then sticks it in his machine and says it was used in a CBG ticket gate at 16:14 but couldn't tell me which date. He takes my details and writes out the form before offering that I can instead of signing it complete another blank Carnet ticket. I decide to accept on the condition I get my original ticket back. He tears it in half along the mag strip and gives it back to me, tells me not to complain or claim a refund or he will reinstate the report for prosecution and leaves.

I then check and find that 16:14 was the time the pack of Carnets was issued to me in early December.

The ticket has definitely not been used and redated as he originally claimed so there are two other options. Either he was reading the issue time of the ticket on the machine or I have mistakenly put it through the gate at Cambridge instead of a normal ticket (although I would have thought the fact a Carnet ticket doesn't operate the gates in Cambridge would have made that obvious.

So did I inadvertently do something wrong and the 16:14 time is just an amazing coincidence or was this all to cover up for his provably false initial claim that I had altered the ticket. And if the latter do I complain and ask for a refund or let sleeping dogs lie? I can of course now do nothing to verify its use or non use from the mag strip data as it is torn in two and unreadable now.

Thanks for any insight you can give.

 

[najaB]

Did you attach the correct photograph? That looks completely unmarked to me.

 

[TonyR]

Did you attach the correct photograph? That looks completely unmarked to me.

Yes, that's where he claimed he could see clear evidence that I had filled in the boxes and then erased them. As I said I always date it on the face because most pens won't write in the red box. Here's a wider view of the ticket.

 

[najaB]

Yes, that's where he claimed he could see clear evidence that I had filled in the boxes and then erased them.

It doesn't look like anything's ever been written there to my eyes.

 

[TonyR]

Glad you agree. But can someone explain what his ticket machine was displaying - was it the issue time of the ticket or the time as he claimed that it had been put through a gate and in either case why could he not tell me the date, just the time?

 

[gray1404]

A number of issues here. The reality is I do not think there is any evidence that the ticket has been used. That date box does not look like it has been used already. You have written the date on the incorrect place on the ticket though and as such, strictly speaking, you have not adhered to the terms and conditions of the ticket.

The Inspector should not be threatening you into not making a complaint. That is just wrong. He has taken your personal details and, as such, this should be handeled in line with the company's Date Protection Policy. As such, he would not be allowed to hold onto the form merely to submit it only if you complain. Should he do this it really would look like malice on his part.

The only way forward here to that you make a complaint to Customer Service of the company and you show them the tickets concerned. They will then have an opportunity to investigate what happened. It sounds like you have paid twice (i.e. used 2 carnet tickets) for the one journey.

In future though please do date your tickets correctly. Otherwise you are in fact travelling on an invalid ticket.

 

[Failed Unit]

See if Cambridge ticket off will give you a pen that will write on them when you buy your next batch. Wgc had them.

Wgc seems inconsistent to be if the barriers accept or reject them so I asked the gateline. They said they should always reject them to check the dates on.

They have the time technology now - the key so why they are still issued on a medium easy to defraud and difficult to write on is beyond me

 

[TonyR]

KGX gates always accepts them. Its only CBG that doesn't on my journey. 99% of pens will not write in the boxes and if you try all you get with most pens is an indentation and you don't want to go over it repeatedly to try to get an ink mark or it really does look like an attempt to alter it. Yes I could find a pen that is the exception but I would need to make sure I always had one on me and it always worked.

At CBG I did have a couple of staff at the gateline in the early days who rejected the ticket with the date written as I have so I asked them to please fill in the boxes for me. They would try, fail and then let me through only to stop me the next time. So I then started to hand them the blank ticket and ask them to fill it in for me. Again they tried and failed so gave up and wrote & signed it on the back. After a couple of weeks of that the point was made and they let me through with it dated on the middle front. If it is strictly invalid I don't think a prosecution could ever suceed. You'd just have to give the judge a handful of pens and tickets to try for himself and I've had no trouble over three years of regular use with the way I do it.

But back to my questions. What was his ticket machine showing? Was it the issue date? Have I made a genuine mistake at some point and put the ticket through a gate at Cambridge? Does a gate time stamp a ticket it rejects? And if it does why only the time and not a date?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Haywain]

But back to my questions. What was his ticket machine showing? Was it the issue date? Have I made a genuine mistake at some point and put the ticket through a gate at Cambridge? Does a gate time stamp a ticket it rejects? And if it does why only the time and not a date?

Answering your questions: His machine was showing a 'time stamp' from the mag strip. It is unlikely that you have mistakenly put the ticket through a barrier. A gate does time stamp a ticket (I'm not sure if that's the case when it's rejected) but it does NOT show the exact time - it can only show in 5 minute increments, so for a ticket put though at 16:14 the time would show as 16:15.

As the coding on the mag strip is restricted by the available space, then ticket office machines can only code the time in the same way, so the only way the inspector could know the time was 16:14 would be from the time printed on the front of the ticket.

In writing the date in the wrong place on the ticket you have effectively, in a strict interpretation of the T&Cs, defaced the ticket and rendered it void. In future you should always write the date in the space indicated and marker type pens that do this very effectively are available (when I am in a position to do so I will post the details of one). However, I am in agreement with Gray1404 that you should contact the train operator and make representations about this, as your treatment may not be considered reasonable and no member of railway staff (in any business) should be discouraging you from passing comment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The ticket is not valid if you don't date in the boxes, AIUI. You need to obtain a fineline permanent marker in order to date it there.

(Yet another Carnet problem because the TOCs involved were too cheap to invest in proper fixed "compostage" equipment... )

 

[Tetchytyke]

Did you attach the correct photograph? That looks completely unmarked to me.

There is some slight discolouration to the orange in the month box which could look like a scratch, but other than that I can't see anything either.

I suspect that the comments about the date and "letting you off so long as you don't complain" are because the RPI knows he screwed up and is trying to cover up his error. It isn't uncommon with GTR RPIs.

 

[TonyR]

Thanks everyone for all the help and advice.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Butterflymind]

For writing on Carnet, the best pen we've ever found is a Staedtler permanent Lumocolor 318 Fine. They'll write in the boxes without smudging afterwards, and the nib's fine enough to make the numbers clear.

 

[Puffing Devil]

(Yet another Carnet problem because the TOCs involved were too cheap to invest in proper fixed "compostage" equipment... )

This all day long!

 

[Failed Unit]

For writing on Carnet, the best pen we've ever found is a Staedtler permanent Lumocolor 318 Fine. They'll write in the boxes without smudging afterwards, and the nib's fine enough to make the numbers clear.

They actually gave them out at WGC last year. Not sure if other stations do.

 

[syorksdeano]

Could the 1614 be the time that the tickets were printed?

Sent from my SM-T555 using Tapatalk

 

[najaB]

Could the 1614 be the time that the tickets were printed?

This was stated in the first post.

 

[syorksdeano]

This was stated in the first post.

Oh yeah.

What are the chances of the ticket system not timed right? The 1614 does seem rather strange

 

[najaB]

What are the chances of the ticket system not timed right? The 1614 does seem rather strange

For a 'Printed at...' time it would be perfectly normal. I'm sure we all have tickets printed at times that aren't a multiple of five minutes.

 

[Haywain]

For writing on Carnet, the best pen we've ever found is a Staedtler permanent Lumocolor 318 Fine. They'll write in the boxes without smudging afterwards, and the nib's fine enough to make the numbers clear.

They're the ones I was thinking of. Years ago, they were recommended, through the late lamented Newsrail Express, for railway staff use for the very purpose of writing on tickets and were made available for purchase alongside ticket supplies from Bemrose Booth.

 

[TonyR]

Given what others have said and thinking back about it, he did suddenly change from filling out the forms to pushing me to sign another Carnet when he realised I had photographed the ticket. Leads me to think that maybe he was hoping to get an easy win towards his Penalty Fare quota but when he realised it would be challenged and I had the evidence he backed off. He did try very hard to get me to accept.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[gray1404]

He could have issued a PF anyway on the basis that the ticket was not validated with the date correctly. Thankfully for the OP he took a different tact.

 

[TonyR]

He could have issued a PF anyway on the basis that the ticket was not validated with the date correctly. Thankfully for the OP he took a different tact.

He could have done but it would be pretty hard, as I've said earlier for them to win that battle. They would have to show that it was reasonably easy to date it correctly and explain why it passed inspection at the gateline which they can't


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[gray1404]

I'm not so sure about that. I certainly think think a PF could have been issued and also a by-law prosecution in the courts would have been successful, as it is a strict liability offence. Thankfully we are not facing that prospect though.

 

[furlong]

He could have done but it would be pretty hard, as I've said earlier for them to win that battle. They would have to show that it was reasonably easy to date it correctly and explain why it passed inspection at the gateline which they can't

And not only that, presumably deal with witness statements from the gateline staff that they authorised this individual to validate the tickets in this non-standard way for good reason, and deal with the assertion that there was no revenue loss and no dishonesty.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Could the 1614 be the time that the tickets were printed?

Yes - it's one of several shared data fields.

One way to have tried to resolve the confusion at the time would have been to ask for all your other unused tickets to be scanned so they could be seen to show identical information.

Because of both lack of space and compatibility considerations, several fields hold different data in different circumstances and have to be considered together to reach the correct interpretation.

 

[TonyR]

Yes - it's one of several shared data fields.

One way to have tried to resolve the confusion at the time would have been to ask for all your other unused tickets to be scanned so they could be seen to show identical information.

I did ask him to do that but he refused.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not so sure about that. I certainly think think a PF could have been issued and also a by-law prosecution in the courts would have been successful, as it is a strict liability offence. Thankfully we are not facing that prospect though.

It is a strict liability offence but the key issue would be was a ticket filled in like that invalid given its virtually impoosible to fill it in as instructed and had been passed as valid by the gate line staff. You cannot entrap somebody into committing an offence.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment#England_and_Wales


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[anme]

I'm not so sure about that. I certainly think think a PF could have been issued and also a by-law prosecution in the courts would have been successful, as it is a strict liability offence. Thankfully we are not facing that prospect though.

I agree that the OP was technically breaking the T&C's of the ticket by writing the date outside the boxes, but:
- It's hard to write the date in the boxes and the OP had clearly written the date elsewhere on the ticket, in an attempt to make it clearer.
- No other T&C's were broken.
- The rail company suffered no financial loss.
- There is no evidence that the OP was trying to evade any fare. (I know that's not necessary for a strict liability offence)
- Courts are busy and have better things to do than deal with such trivial cases.

So even if a judge did agree that the OP was guilty of a bylaw offence, might they not decide that only a minimal fine was appropriate, and that no or minimal costs would be awarded? This would mean that bringing the prosecution would risk costing the rail company money. Would they really take such a trivial case to court?

 

[rs101]

Interestingly, National Rail just says the tickets must be dated in DD/mm format ( http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/prb225ca2e6e40ef93d44bccd007b205.aspx ), doesn't say in the boxes provided.
Chiltern T&C does say use the boxes, Thameslink doesn't..

So yet again, inconsistencies between TOCs. Surely there should be standard wording in the T&C across all TOCs which offer them as to how to validate them?

 

[gray1404]

Could you OP confirm if they have written a complaint to the train company yet? If so, did you enclose the tickets (or copies of) concerned? It will be very interesting to see what their reply is.

 

[TonyR]

Could you OP confirm if they have written a complaint to the train company yet? If so, did you enclose the tickets (or copies of) concerned? It will be very interesting to see what their reply is.

Not yet. Its on this weekend's To Do list.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk