Could new report from Transport Focus Help 1st time offences *which were unintentional*

[Egg Centric]

When Penalty Fares were first introduced in 1989, they cost £10; the value of that now is in the region of about £30, adjusted for inflation. Certainly nowhere near the amounts currently charged.

Without distracting from the main point - did you get an early payment discount back then? I thought it came in on the £100 increase.

It would be helpful to know how many penalty fares are 1) Paid at all 2) Paid on time for the discount 3) Appealed 4) Paid after a failed appeal. I suspect "they" won't reveal some of these numbers though (especially 4 because I think we all know there's an elephant in the room there).

 

[Sonic1234]

£20 was “no longer an effective deterrent”

But is on the roads. Outside of London a lot of parking tickets, if paid quickly, are £25.

A factor with parking enforcement is a lot of people believe the penalty is much higher.

 

[PyrahnaRanger]

Have we reached the point where there should be a ticket machine at the entrance to every station? Arguably that would remove much of the ambiguity around the requirement to purchase a ticket before boarding

I think the industry may be it's own worst enemy in some regards here - as an example, my local line is the Cumbrian Coast line. Many stations didn't have ticket office facilities for decades, and you bought a ticket off the guard if you didn't get on at Whitehaven or Workington. All of a sudden, there are ticket machines, and people who've been doing one thing for years are suddenly expected to do something different. Fair enough, change happens. Then, it becomes a Penalty Fare offence to have not bought a ticket, but the guard is quite happy to continue selling tickets, and people are happy to keep buying them from him, so everyone is happy until the day the RPIs turn up and book everyone for doing something that has effectively been condoned for years. The messaging and the end result needs to be more consistent. Skinner didn't train his pigeons by being inconsistent...

Problem is, many people get warned now, but they don't heed the warning and as it's often verbal, they just keep doing it until they get caught and then try playing the victim,

See my point above. I saw it on a Blackpool-Lime Street train a few weeks ago: guy got on at Preston without a ticket and asks the guard to buy one. Guard says I told you yesterday you need to buy them at the station before you get on or you'll get fined in future. Guy says "are you going to fine me then?" Guards says he can't as he's not allowed to, so the guy just says Ok, can I buy a ticket then?" Guard says yes. Who does that help?

 

[Mag_seven]

The messaging and the end result needs to be more consistent.

And when that happens e.g. penalty fares issued without question, people complain that no "discretion" is being shown.

 

[BazingaTribe]

Then there’s all this stuff about checking a national database of railcards, or a national database of ‘yellow cards’, aren’t people going to invoke GDPR against all this data sharing?

Just wanted to circle back on this. Not a lawyer myself, but have handled data under the oversight of the GDPR and have some legal scholarship under my belt in the form of a Masters in Law Research.

A national database on railcards would be opt-in, so consent would have been given when applying for the card.

A national database of 'yellow cards' would be similar to driving licence records -- kept for the purposes of preventing additional breaches of the law akin to having points on your licence. There are a lot of moving parts to driving legislation, far more than might be needed for enforcement of railway legislation, but the way licences are administrated and endorsed probably doesn't fall foul of the GDPR, and any policy for a yellow card system (which is a good idea in theory) would be worked on to be compliant with data protection legislation.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

A national database on railcards would be opt-in, so consent would have been given when applying for the card.

It has to exist already, in part at least and has done for many years.

When I am logged in to https://secure.railcard.co.uk/Account/My-Railcards, it shows my railcard history going back to 2012.

 

[Haywain]

When I am logged in to https://secure.railcard.co.uk/Account/My-Railcards, it shows my railcard history going back to 2012.

I can see my history of purchases from that site, but not purchases from others, so it proves nothing.

 

[PyrahnaRanger]

And when that happens e.g. penalty fares issued without question, people complain that no "discretion" is being shown.

Yes, but when you do start to apply discretion, you then end up with a situation where people are shown it or not based on what grounds? Attitude test? Mates with the guards relative? Looking like a thug and I don't want to tangle with you?

If the expectation is that every time you get caught breaking a rule you'll get the reasonable level of punishment that is designed to go with it, then surely there's less cause for people to complain?

To pick up on the speeding analogy earlier: if you choose to break the speed limit, you expect that if you get caught you will be punished. You hope not to get caught, and you hope if you do you can beg for discretion, but there's no right to it.

Referring back to the Cumbrian Coast - let's imagine you as an RPI jump on the train at St Bees heading south. People get on all the way down, and explain they've been buying off the guard for years. Do you give them the benefit of discretion and tell them next time you'll fine them, and become just one more person in a Northern uniform telling them the same thing, or do you PF them? If you don't PF them and they carry on doing what they were doing, are you coming back day after day after day to check they are now buying on the platform?

This is probably where the yellow card database would be handy - guard fills details in when selling ticket, and the next time that person does the same thing, they're flagged as need to pay a penalty. Heck, you could even program the system to do it automatically - just stick a couple of quid on the fare each time a guard sells them a ticket

Joking aside, there are tech hurdles to it, but it makes sense I'd you want to apply discretion for a first infraction, then move to punitive measures.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

I can see my history of purchases from that site, but not purchases from others, so it proves nothing.

It proves that the data exists, so a superuser could, if legally allowed, see everyone. I doubt you could see a third party's ticket buying activities on Trainline or other booking sites but that doesn't stop the TOCs researching it.

 

[Haywain]

It proves that the data exists,

The existence of data isn't a national database.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

The existence of data isn't a national database.

It isn't, but why do TOCs ask for evidence of a Railcard when for some past buyers at least they could find out directly?

 

[Haywain]

It isn't, but why do TOCs ask for evidence of a Railcard when for some past buyers at least they could find out directly?

Because the absence of a record on a database isn't proof that no railcard was held. Plus the existence of a national database is presumably current rather than historic.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Because the absence of a record on a database isn't proof that no railcard was held.

It's prescence however would indicate that it was. So do they check before demanding proof?

 

[BazingaTribe]

It's prescence however would indicate that it was. So do they check before demanding proof?

I think what Haywain is trying to say is that purchase records in your account are just that -- purchase records. They don't connect up to a database including those purchased, say, over the counter or on different apps.

Being asked to provide proof in this respect would be showing either the proof of purchase on your app or a paper copy that you might well have retained.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

I think what Haywain is trying to say is that purchase records in your account are just that -- purchase records. They don't connect up to a database including those purchased, say, over the counter or on different apps.

The implication is that it's balkanised with each delivery channel having its own set of records. That said, why is it that within a delivery channel there's not always a warning of expired railcards? I've always bought Senior Raicards through cashing in Tesco Clubcard points and this recent posting was brought about by the fact that I received an email reminder that the current one is approaching expiry. For preference I use a computer rather than a phone.

 

[Hadders]

I think the industry may be it's own worst enemy in some regards here - as an example, my local line is the Cumbrian Coast line. Many stations didn't have ticket office facilities for decades, and you bought a ticket off the guard if you didn't get on at Whitehaven or Workington. All of a sudden, there are ticket machines, and people who've been doing one thing for years are suddenly expected to do something different. Fair enough, change happens. Then, it becomes a Penalty Fare offence to have not bought a ticket, but the guard is quite happy to continue selling tickets, and people are happy to keep buying them from him, so everyone is happy until the day the RPIs turn up and book everyone for doing something that has effectively been condoned for years. The messaging and the end result needs to be more consistent. Skinner didn't train his pigeons by being inconsistent...

My view is tickets should not be sold on board, this is what causes confusion. There should be a ticket vending machine at every station, if necessary card only and promise to pay for those who want to pay in cash.

 

[BazingaTribe]

The implication is that it's balkanised with each delivery channel having its own set of records. That said, why is it that within a delivery channel there's not always a warning of expired railcards? I've always bought Senior Raicards through cashing in Tesco Clubcard points and this recent posting was brought about by the fact that I received an email reminder that the current one is approaching expiry. For preference I use a computer rather than a phone.

When I bought my railcards, I wrote down my email address on the paper application form. I haven't bought any since I got my first smartphone in 2014 although I know I had one the previous year as it was useful for trips down to my parents' holiday cottage in Dorset but then I met my late husband and we drove down there together instead. I didn't generally pay attention to the resulting emails (still don't really unless e.g. I have a hotel booking like this evening), but they'd have got it from wherever you input it when you signed up. It's no more of a national database than my All4+ streaming service account which will send me a reminder that my yearly subscription is due to lapse in September.

I haven't bought one in years as it never made any sense but the thing is, while you presumably gave them your email address at the time of purchase, that doesn't mean there's a full database out there -- only that you ensured they had a way of contacting you for renewal purposes (and presumably marketing if you'd let them). All it is is an entry on a computer somewhere that sends you reminders because you once bought something from them that needs renewal. It doesn't mean someone with a handheld ticketing device can look you up as having a railcard if you can't show it to them on the day you travel.

 

[Haywain]

The implication is that it's balkanised with each delivery channel having its own set of records.

No, the implication is that there are reasons why records may not appear on a database. Particularly for railcards purchased at stations application forms could get lost in the post or there could be errors in data entry - such things are unfortunate but entirely possible.

 

[sheff1]

Nothing significant will change until the legal framework around ticketing and ticketing irregularities changes. This requires urgent reform as the Regulation of the Railways Act, Railway Byelaws and even Penalty Fares Regulations were written in the era before it was possible to buy tickets online or through apps.

For example, a ticket purchased onboard from a guard after the train has departed is clearly a valid ticket. But what if the ticket is purchased onboard from an app after the train has departed? As it currently stands the law is silent on this.

Have we reached the point where there should be a ticket machine at the entrance to every station? Arguably that would remove much of the ambiguity around the requirement to purchase a ticket before boarding.

If someone boards a train 10 mins before departure without a ticket they are committing an offence under current laws. Of course they intend to, and do, purchase a ticket after they have sat down and well before the train departs but are still "guilty" according to the law.

A ticket machine at the station entrance would be good if it allowed the purchase of all valid tickets. At present many don't - should be easy to solve but some TOCs clearly don't want to.

 

[Statto]

A ticket machine at the station entrance would be good if it allowed the purchase of all valid tickets. At present many don't - should be easy to solve but some TOCs clearly don't want to.

Indeed, Chester for example has ticket machines (installed by TFW), but they're about as much use as a chocolate fireguard, as they don't sell the full range of tickets, like the North Wales Rover, i had to wait for the ticket window to open in the ticket office before buying the North Wales Rover last summer.

I do think if TOCs have ticket machines installed at stations, they should be forced to sell the full range of tickets from those machines, even if they're not for the TOC.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

All it is is an entry on a computer somewhere that sends you reminders because you once bought something from them that needs renewal. It doesn't mean someone with a handheld ticketing device can look you up as having a railcard if you can't show it to them on the day you travel.

It goes a bit beyond that as stored on my computer is a userid and password to access the website history. It happens that the userid is my email address which is a common piece of system design.

If a ticket inspector had a device that could login to the website, it could check the railcard status. It would necessarily need some means of tying the website record to the person whose ticket they were trying to validate.

Now there's a question. I'm travelling with my laptop but without a physical railcard. Assuming operational wifi or some other means of internet connection, can the existence of a railcard be proved by reference to the purchase history. If not, then why not?

 

[Haywain]

can the existence of a railcard be proved by reference to the purchase history. If not, then why not?

Quite simply because the railcard T&Cs say you must carry the railcard.

 

[AlterEgo]

Assuming operational wifi or some other means of internet connection, can the existence of a railcard be proved by reference to the purchase history. If not, then why not?

How could the railway have any assurance that I am the person on my Disabled Railcard, or have assurance that someone else wasn't "borrowing" it that day? It doesn't have a photo.

 

[Kite159]

My view is tickets should not be sold on board, this is what causes confusion. There should be a ticket vending machine at every station, if necessary card only and promise to pay for those who want to pay in cash.

And what would you suggest the guard would do if they are unable to sell tickets on board to those either who think payment is optional or can't use a TVM due to a disability?

Go down the conflict route of collecting details?

 

[BazingaTribe]

It goes a bit beyond that as stored on my computer is a userid and password to access the website history. It happens that the userid is my email address which is a common piece of system design.

If a ticket inspector had a device that could login to the website, it could check the railcard status. It would necessarily need some means of tying the website record to the person whose ticket they were trying to validate.

Now there's a question. I'm travelling with my laptop but without a physical railcard. Assuming operational wifi or some other means of internet connection, can the existence of a railcard be proved by reference to the purchase history. If not, then why not?

They'd need access to a dozen different apps and so on at the moment, and access to whichever station processed my paper applications back in the day.

A database would be cool, but it just doesn't exist right now. But given you're issued a physical or digital copy of the railcard, it's madness not to carry it anyway.

 

[Hadders]

And what would you suggest the guard would do if they are unable to sell tickets on board to those either who think payment is optional or can't use a TVM due to a disability?

Go down the conflict route of collecting details?

People who think payment is optional - no change to current arrangements. If they're refusing to buy a ticket it doesn't matter what ticketing purchasing facilities exist but what we're talking about here isn't ticketless travel but how to prevent people being criminalised for making 'honest mistakes'. Part of the reason that happens is because in some areas of the country it is custom and practice to purchase onboard but in other areas it isn't. My view is there should be a ticket machine at the entrance to every station and sales of tickets on board should cease.

Clearly, there have to be safeguards for people who cannot use a TVM due to disability.

 

[BazingaTribe]

Clearly, there have to be safeguards for people who cannot use a TVM due to disability.

I'd be interested in seeing how disability orgs respond to this. I personally moved to e-tickets as soon as I could, long before I was injured and left permanently disabled. (I am autistic but was using trains here and on the continent long before I realised I was anything other than just weird so had no real issues with accessibility there). This might not capture the entire market but must make inroads into those who actually need more accessible facilities in general.

To be honest I'd trust disabled organisations to handle this with appropriate messaging and consultation. A lot of well-meaning lay people make the mistake of thinking we're all completely incapacitated or broke, which isn't always the case, and thus make it harder to actually speak up in our actual interests. (Similarly with older people -- my boomer parents are in their 70s and have smartphones and it's probably the case that older people might have difficulty using electronics but the number of people who are completely unfamiliar with technology will probably dwindle as time ticks on.)

The important thing when talking about disability and accessibility is not to make assumptions that, while based on legitimate sentiments, often sound a bit patronising as a result. (I have no issues with people offering me assistance -- sometimes I'll even take it if my spoons are running low. But some people leap to my defence without really thinking about how they come across, and that's something that legit disability organisations tend not to do.)

 

[Pushpit]

Clearly, there have to be safeguards for people who cannot use a TVM due to disability.

My elderly mother lives by a Northern Line station with the new(ish) big TVMs and she really struggles with them. Not due really to disability, she simply grew up in a world without such technology. She is intimidated by the screen, intimidated by the options, worries about pressing the wrong option, not used to using a keypad, and yes a bit of a Luddite in her too. She simply does not understand why for 80 years of her life there was staff at the station to help her, and now there is not. She's basically given up using the train on her own, not just due to the TVMs it should be said, but if you ask her why, she will say she hated the TVMs. I don't have an answer to this one - believe me I've tried to find one.

Whereas I have another elderly relative with multiple severe congenital mental health issues, generally non verbal, and yet he can wizz around the same TVM faster than me.

Now you can't build a GB wide ticket buying strategy around 2 elderly people who don't pump much money into the rail system. But I do feel (a) customers should be treated as customers, if there is a clear intent to pay - even after boarding; (b) then there are people who don't intend to pay and it really isn't difficult to work out who they are - short fares, donuts, manipulating railcards, borrowing Freedom Passes, Jobcentre, railcards six months expired. If there is evidence of intent, been on the train 30 minutes and not approached train crew - they get dealt with severely. If there is no or limited evidence of intent then a warning follows and in doubt, that's the default. At the worst extreme, someone gets away with stealing from the railways, but only once.

 

[Kite159]

People who think payment is optional - no change to current arrangements. If they're refusing to buy a ticket it doesn't matter what ticketing purchasing facilities exist but what we're talking about here isn't ticketless travel but how to prevent people being criminalised for making 'honest mistakes'. Part of the reason that happens is because in some areas of the country it is custom and practice to purchase onboard but in other areas it isn't. My view is there should be a ticket machine at the entrance to every station and sales of tickets on board should cease.

Clearly, there have to be safeguards for people who cannot use a TVM due to disability.

So basically if someone decides not to buy beforehand (for whatever reason), the guard can't sell them an undiscounted ticket.

What needs to happen is for a big push on advertising that people need to buy before they board and if they decide not to buy beforehand the guard only selling anytime tickets with no railcards unless it's a valid reason (someone wanting to pay cash at a station which only takes card)

Unless you are expecting the guard to take details to pass onto the back office revenue team for further action, unless there is a member of revenue floating around on the train or at a station the train calls at which can deal with it.

 

[ainsworth74]

My view is tickets should not be sold on board, this is what causes confusion. There should be a ticket vending machine at every station, if necessary card only and promise to pay for those who want to pay in cash.

I saw this happen today about an hour ago. Fella gets on at Redcar Central (ticket office + TVM available) and sits next to me. Conductor comes through and the fella asks for a single to Middlesbrough which he pays for using his debit card. Yet the day before, if the guy had done this, he would have gotten a Penalty Fare because the day before the same train had RPIs onboard. That's an extremely high level of inconsistency. One day this person pays £5.10, the next day it's £105.10 (or £55.10).

Now, I reckon that this fella was trying it on (there were several furtive glances over the shoulder in the direction the conductor was coming from which make me think they were hoping he wouldn't reach them in time) so I'd have no qualm with them getting a PF. But equally there's plenty of people for whom it's not an attempt to fare evade, it's just what they've always done. Pay the conductor on board. Indeed I've seen RPIs have that very argument with people ("I bought on board last week, why are now giving me a penalty fare, how is this fair?!"). Some of them may well be trying it on, but I doubt it's all of them.

Try explaining to an average member of the public that one member of Northern staff wearing Northern uniform will sell them a ticket on board, but another member of Northern staff also wearing the same Northern uniform will not sell them a ticket but will instead issue them a PF....

At the very least I reckon that conductors need to be always be giving people a verbal warning when they issue tickets that, if an RPI were checking tickets, would lead to a PF being issued. Some do (I've heard them do it), but by no means all.