Falsely accused

[m&m]

I was travelling from Norbiton station with my 8 yr old son yesterday at 8am when I was stopped by a staff with a yellow tabard in the barrier. He asked me how old is my son and what ticket was I using. I told him I have an oyster travelcard zones 2-5. He told me that I have to pay for my son in railway as he is only free in tube and buses when he travels with me. A fact that I did not know. I went straight to cashier to purchase his ticket but the queue was too long and I would be late to catch the 8.05 train and I will be late for work. It dawned on me that I could actually pay him through contactless and it did not matter if I pay more as long as I won't be late as I have a meeting.

I got to the barrier tap in my contactless and the staff asked me what I was doing. So I explained that the queue was long so I would just pay my son through my contactless card. He still won't let me in because I wasn't paying the right child fare. I said to him that I know I pay more but what matters I get the train so I won't be late. He continued to say that the contactless card was mine and not my son! I don't see his point as if I get my son's ticket from the cashier I will use my contactless card to pay for it anyway as my 8 yr old son does not earn money! I started to raise my voice in frustration seeing the train I supposed to take just stopped and he will not let me in.

He then started to say I am shouting at him infront of my son and accused me that the day before I was there in Norbiton as well with my other son trying to get into the barrier without paying and he didn't say anything at that time! I was shocked by the accusation as I only have one son! He then changed his statement to the same child and say he has the CCTV to prove it. I felt humiliated infront of my son and in front of other commuters. It was not true as my son was at school the day before and did not travel with me until that Friday because it is their inset day. I was frustrated by the whole thing and horrified of his accusations and at that point was actually angry to be accused of lying infront of my son. I asked him of his name because I need to complain about his behaviour, he won't give it to me and he still going on and on about he did his job not to let me in. My point is he accused me of something I did not do!

At the end the cashier get me the ticket for my son. I always pay for my rail tickets and had I known my son needs one I could have get a ticket in advance. I wasn't supposed to not pay infact I was supposed to pay more for him by paying contactless adult fare. I have spoken to another 2 staff in customer service when I rang and said that I could have paid through my contactless.

This incident has caused me late for work, failure to attend my meeting, humiliated in front of my son and other passengers and accused falsely by a SWT staff in Norbiton to think I have not started work yet! My son said to me it was a worsed experience asking me if I am okay and that the man was wrong.
I am thinking of complaining and they said it will take 20 days and they have back log but my question is, has anyone who complain really had some results came out of it? I demand this staff apology in front of me and my son and challenge them to get the CCTV a day before. Railway staff should not treat their customers like this and certainly have to get their facts right and not make any false accusations.

 

[yorkie]

It is perfectly legitimate for you to use your contactless card to pay the adult fare for your son. The staff were incorrect.

Have you written to SWT yet? Or just contacted them by phone? Are they getting back to you?

If they do not give a satisfactory response, I'd take it to Transport Focus and also report a breach of consumer law to the ORR for them to investigate (there are numerous breaches occurring and nothing much seems to be done about it, so it's about time the ORR did something).

 

[najaB]

I am thinking of complaining and they said it will take 20 days and they have back log but my question is, has anyone who complain really had some results came out of it? I demand this staff apology in front of me and my son and challenge them to get the CCTV a day before. Railway staff should not treat their customers like this and certainly have to get their facts right and not make any false accusations.

Some people have had satisfactory responses to complaints, some people have not. Most replies are somewhere in-between.

As to expecting an in-person apology from the staff member involved, I'd say there's virtually no chance that will happen.

 

[Agent_c]

2.6 TfL contactless cards conditions of carriage:

Only one person at a time can use a contactless payment card for travel. You may pay another person’s pay as you go fare with a contactless payment card only if they are travelling with you and you have paid your fare by another means.

Seems conclusive to me.

 

[najaB]

Seems conclusive to me.

The OP said they have an Oyster travelcard.

 

[causton]

The OP said they have an Oyster travelcard.

So yes conclusive, as the OP has paid their "fare by another means"!

 

[yorkie]

Seems conclusive to me.

agreed, conclusively valid.

 

[najaB]

So yes conclusive, as the OP has paid their "fare by another means"!

Ah, for some reason I was reading it to mean conclusive that the OP *couldn't* pay the son's fare by contactless.

 

[bb21]

Do complain. It is important that these members of staff have such incidents on their records so that over time, if stronger disciplinary actions become necessary, the company have the evidence to back them up. Part of the reason why some people get away with things like that repeatedly is that some passengers never complain, so the company never has anything to go on to take action.

 

[ComUtoR]

Can a child travel using an Adult ticket ? Does ticket validity specific age ? If a child has an adult ticket surely that is not a valid ticket ? If an adult has a child ticket it is not valid. Why does it not work in reverse ?

If a child is allowed an adult ticket then is that acceptable overcharging ?

 

[gray1404]

Can a child travel using an Adult ticket ? Does ticket validity specific age ? If a child has an adult ticket surely that is not a valid ticket ? If an adult has a child ticket it is not valid. Why does it not work in reverse ?

If a child is allowed an adult ticket then is that acceptable overcharging ?

Yes its fine as its basically paying the full price fare for a journey. A child ticket is merely a discounted ticket and a customer is under no duty whatsoever to accept a discount if they don't want one be that a child wanting an adult ticket, a PRIV card holder wanting to pay full fare or a railcard holder wishing not to avail of their railcard. Another example is a customer traveling on a train on which Off Peak tickets are valid but insisting on traveling on an Anytime fare or a first class ticket holder choosing to travel in standard.

The reason why this cannot be compared to an adult traveling incorrectly on a child ticket is that when a child travels on an adult ticket, there is no loss of revenue to the TOC and the traveller still holds a valid ticket for the journey they wish to make.

 

[m&m]

Guys, thank you very much for all your responses. I will complete a feedback form and send it on Monday.
@yorkie - thanks for the PM I don't think I can send a pm yet as I am new.

I don't normally complain but I just feel I don't want this person to get away with what he has done.

Once again thank you all.

 

[jon0844]

Can a child travel using an Adult ticket ? Does ticket validity specific age ? If a child has an adult ticket surely that is not a valid ticket ? If an adult has a child ticket it is not valid. Why does it not work in reverse ?

If a child is allowed an adult ticket then is that acceptable overcharging ?

You can sit in standard with a first class ticket and not be ordered to move.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Can a child travel using an Adult ticket ? Does ticket validity specific age ? If a child has an adult ticket surely that is not a valid ticket ? If an adult has a child ticket it is not valid. Why does it not work in reverse ?

If a child is allowed an adult ticket then is that acceptable overcharging ?

In very simple terms a child between and including the ages of 5 and 15 years is generally entitled to claim a 50% discount off the full fare, but is not obliged to do so.

An adult of 16 years or older is generally not entitled to claim that discount.

 

[Surreytraveller]

You could obtain a child ZIP Oystercard for your son and put some pay as you go credit on it. Then on the occasion he accompanies you no the train, he will obtain child fares without having to queue for a ticket.

But in my experience, Gateline staff are generally not trained to a high standard with regards to the validity of tickets, particularly discounted ones. So, he probably thought he was correct, not realising the deficiency in his training.

 

[ComUtoR]

Cheers gray1404/Fare-cCop

 

[pfkshanks]

But in my experience, Gateline staff are generally not trained to a high standard with regards to the validity of tickets, particularly discounted ones. So, he probably thought he was correct, not realising the deficiency in his training.

A very broad and unnecessary generalisation?

 

[Wolfie]

You could obtain a child ZIP Oystercard for your son and put some pay as you go credit on it. Then on the occasion he accompanies you no the train, he will obtain child fares without having to queue for a ticket.

But in my experience, Gateline staff are generally not trained to a high standard with regards to the validity of tickets, particularly discounted ones. So, he probably thought he was correct, not realising the deficiency in his training.

A good post with useful information.

A staff member believing he is in the right due to inadequate training is understandable albeit unacceptable. What is not certainly not acceptable is the way, at least if the OP is to be believed, the staff member has gone about handling the whole thing.

Do complain. It is important that these members of staff have such incidents on their records so that over time, if stronger disciplinary actions become necessary, the company have the evidence to back them up. Part of the reason why some people get away with things like that repeatedly is that some passengers never complain, so the company never has anything to go on to take action.

Too damn right. There are rather too many of these apparently unaccountable individuals, sadly all too often backed up by their fellow staff on this forum, around the system. Sadly those bad eggs make things harded for the majority of decent staff too.

Some people have had satisfactory responses to complaints, some people have not. Most replies are somewhere in-between.

As to expecting an in-person apology from the staff member involved, I'd say there's virtually no chance that will happen.

Sorry but to be blunt if a staff member behaves like a muppet and wrongly humiliates someone in front of both their child and other customers then the humiliation of having to apologise to that individual in private is the least that should happen to them.

 

[arabianights]

Sorry but to be blunt if a staff member behaves like a muppet and wrongly humiliates someone in front of both their child and other customers then the humiliation of having to apologise to that individual in private is the least that should happen to them.

On the other side of the coin, I think there's something of a duty on the passenger to have a bit of "reasonable firmness". By the OP's own admission they were raising their voice on very little provocation before the member of staff begins the "humiliating" (hardly the stocks is it?)

 

[najaB]

Sorry but to be blunt if a staff member behaves like a muppet and wrongly humiliates someone in front of both their child and other customers then the humiliation of having to apologise to that individual in private is the least that should happen to them.

I remind you that we have only heard one side of the story...

 

[Wolfie]

I remind you that we have only heard one side of the story...

I fully agree, hence earlier in my post I wrote "What is not certainly not acceptable is the way, at least if the OP is to be believed, the staff member has gone about handling the whole thing."

my bold

 

[DarloRich]

Guys, thank you very much for all your responses. I will complete a feedback form and send it on Monday.
@yorkie - thanks for the PM I don't think I can send a pm yet as I am new.

I don't normally complain but I just feel I don't want this person to get away with what he has done.

Once again thank you all.

Don't fill in a feed back form. Write a letter to SWT at:

Customer Relations
South West Trains
Overline House
Southampton
SO15 1GW

 

[Busaholic]

This true story of recent occurrence doesn't relate to railways but is, I believe, of relevance to the post as it concerns getting an apology from a member of staff who behaves in an egregious way.
A very good friend of mine (Jean) has owned and resided in a particular house in Cornwall since 1988. The number of the house she lives in is 22. When the estate she lives on was built there was a late alteration to plans and two further houses were built between those already allocated to nos. 22 and 24 and, rather than re-allocate all the numbers, those houses became nos 22A and 22B. Jean has, on regular occasions, received mail for those houses but otherwise there was never a problem, until this summer.
No. 22A had been occupied for decades by a couple who, in their nineties, had to give it up and go and live with their daughter a few miles away.The house went up for sale but, perhaps as a result of being completely unmodernised, saw very few visits.The mail had been redirected but the daughter called in every couple of months in case any got through, which it did. Back in August
she called at my friend's and handed over a letter addressed to Jean, but at no 22A. This letter was from Cornwall Council and concerned non-payment of council tax at 22A (Jean was paying no 22's by direct debit as always). Ex-neighbour's daughter said she had been told there would be no council tax to pay for the first six months while the place was unoccupied and seemed generally uninterested.
Jean thought she better nip this in the bud and visited the council offices to say there had been a complete mix-up. The woman there would not have this and said there could not have been, their info came from the Land Registry and, in any case, if Jean contested it she would have to do so through a solicitor at her own expense.

Fast forward to mid October. Ex-neighbours' daughter calls round again with a letter. this times from Camborne Magistrates Court with a summons addressed to Jean, for a date a week previously. Jean's son, who has a law degree though never used it, calls at the council offices to demand an explanation and apology but is met by the same truculent woman who says that, even if their information and actions were wrong, she and they will never apologise! The Land Registry confirm that no 22A is still owned by the original couple and has nothing to do with Jean.

The position now is that three letters have been received by Jean:
1) Chief Executive of Cornwall Council with abject apologies and an assurance that the order made in Jean's understandable absence at the Magistrates Court has been made null and void
2) A personal letter from the NAMED individual at the council offices expressing her contrition at her personal behaviour
3) A letter from her MP, who had also got in touch with the Chief Executive.

So, there are occasions when people can be made to eat humble pie, particularly if retaining their job at the end of it is at stake.

Apologies if considered off-topic, but I've explained why I don't think it is.

 

[najaB]

2) A personal letter from the NAMED individual at the council offices expressing her contrition at her personal behaviour

All of which just confirms what I said in a since-deleted post: the OP may get a letter from the staff member concerned, but the odds of getting the grovelling face-to-face apology they requested are near-zero.

 

[Slimjim1]

Without condoning anyone who does not do their job conscientiously I wonder why people chase an unwilling apology especially after the original problem has been dealt with. An apology is only as good as the genuine feeling behind it. If the OP does end up getting the apology (s)he so obviously craves (unlikely in this case) is it worth anything if the person concerned is only uttering a series of words (that they clearly do not mean) in order to keep their job? I have just realised that attempting to force apologies out of the unwilling make lawyers even richer than they are already.