Fare Dodgers!

[ralphchadkirk]

Theft in English law basically means taking something tangible that isn't yours

I don't think so...

(1)“Property” includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.
From the Theft Act 1968.

 

[WestCoast]

I'm not legal expert but...

A quick search reveals that the Theft Act 1978 covered "Obtaining services by deception" and a clause "It is also an offence to make off without paying. This does not require a deception".

However, this was repealed under the Fraud Act 2006 which covered "Obtaining services dishonestly".

Anyone know more on the legal situation, or is it adequately covered by bylaws?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Anyone know more on the legal situation, or is it adequately covered by bylaws?

It's adequately covered by byelaws:

18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas
(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.
(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.
(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
16
(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, he began his journey; or
(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket.

And the Regulation of Railways Act.

 

[WestCoast]

1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.

So no buy on board then, except when

(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, he began his journey; or

OK, fine.

(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or

Then as cuccir says, Northern Rail's "STOP! FULL TICKET INSPECTIONS! You must buy before a ticket before boarding, this is a legal requirement" posters are very misleading indeed:? I've seen these posters at Bolton, Salford Crescent and New Mills Central among other places.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

It continually almost amazes me how many people equate fare evasion with theft. At worst it is fraud, which is legally equivalent to theft but completely different. . . . . .

In the matter of rail travel, then we simply don't need to trouble ourselves with either the Theft Act nor with the Fraud Act, as the have quite adequate Laws to cover the issue on the Railways. As ralphchadkirk has noted above, these are the Regularion of Railways Act 1889 and the Railway Byelaws which are empowered under that Act.
Its remarkable that we still run the Railways under a 122 year-old law, but we do, and that is what is used to prosecute Fare Evasion and any other alledged travel without a valid ticket if the passenger doesn't avail themselves of an opportunity to pay before it reaches prosecution.

I acknowledge that many on here like to draw analogies with buying goods or services and how they may pay for them, or with the 'fairness' of how other services are supplied and obtained, but those analogies, like the reference to Theft or Fraud, are flawed if they don't directly compare to rail travel and Railway Law.

 

[34D]

Maybe one day the government will decide to put up taxes and give everyone free rail travel. No money needed for barriers, RP staff made redundant, and better for the environment.

 

[Jonny]

I'm not legal expert but...

A quick search reveals that the Theft Act 1978 covered "Obtaining services by deception" and a clause "It is also an offence to make off without paying. This does not require a deception".

However, this was repealed under the Fraud Act 2006 which covered "Obtaining services dishonestly".

Anyone know more on the legal situation, or is it adequately covered by bylaws?

It sounds like it is byelaws and Regulation of Railways Act 1889 that are normally used with the fraud act in reserve for serious cases. The use of theft charges per se would quite frankly be laughable; after all the railway has lost practically nothing compared to someone not travelling.

 

[IanPooleTrains]

Well, I'd like to add to this if I may.

I agree with the issues brought up in the OP's initial post that there are fare dodgers of all kinds but another spin on things is, it doesn't help matters when ticket inspectors do not do their job and go around checking or handing out tickets for people to buy.

As many of you who have seen previous threads done by myself, London Midland are amongst the most guilty for this especially south of Northampton to Euston where yesterday, I found the guard for the train sleeping in one of the cabs between the connecting units.

You could say that people who evade fares for their own reasons are guilty but when inspectors don't do their job, that makes it even worse in my opinion.

Another 'incident' yesterday was when I was on the train back from Euston and a couple of African-American teens got on the train at rugby to get to Nuneaton, both saw the inspector coming up and both said for everyone to hear 'I'm not paying for my ticket'

So I agree that there are all different types but there are other mitigating circumstances which could contribute to this

 

[RJ]

Well, I'd like to add to this if I may.

I agree with the issues brought up in the OP's initial post that there are fare dodgers of all kinds but another spin on things is, it doesn't help matters when ticket inspectors do not do their job and go around checking or handing out tickets for people to buy.

As many of you who have seen previous threads done by myself, London Midland are amongst the most guilty for this especially south of Northampton to Euston where yesterday, I found the guard for the train sleeping in one of the cabs between the connecting units.

You could say that people who evade fares for their own reasons are guilty but when inspectors don't do their job, that makes it even worse in my opinion.

Another 'incident' yesterday was when I was on the train back from Euston and a couple of African-American teens got on the train at rugby to get to Nuneaton, both saw the inspector coming up and both said for everyone to hear 'I'm not paying for my ticket'

So I agree that there are all different types but there are other mitigating circumstances which could contribute to this

How do you know that said person was the conductor? The train wouldn't be able to go if the conductor wasn't doing their job, as their primary responsibility is the safety of the train. They're not obliged to sell tickets either - there is a PF scheme in operation.

What relevance does the ethnicity of those passengers have BTW?

 

[1V53]

The ethnicity is relevant to many of us working in revenue protection/collection.... It amazes me how few of our pax are black, yet what a high proportion of fare dodgers are black.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Fare dodging comes in many forms, and as well as the usual stereotypes about chavs, kids and yobbos, also - in my view - includes:

a) Commuters who buy Open Returns and then, when the "Any tickets from X" call is made do not hand over their tickets for inspection as they know the ticket will get stamped and they will not be able to use it again. By keeping quiet their ticket will not get checked and they will use it again.

b) People of any description who pretend to be asleep or stare out of the window hoping you won't trouble them, and when you do they often do not have a ticket. More often that not, in my experience, these are regular business travellers.

c) People who suddenly need to go to the toilet in a hurry when the inspector comes. A few weeks ago whilst doing a call over ticket check between two major stations on a busy train I noted a male suddenly leap out of his seat and tried to get past me down the aisle towards the toilet. As I did not recognise the male and was pretty sure I hadn't seen his ticket already, I asked to see his ticket. He told me, in front of the whole carriage, that he was desperate for the toilet, if he didn't go now he would wet himself and he didn't have time to find his ticket before going to the loo. I noted the toilet was engaged and advised the male that he had plenty of time to show me his ticket as the toilet was engaged anyway. After the "ticket dance", much patting of pockets and rummaging through his wallet 3 or 4 times, it came to light he didn't have a ticket at all. I duly sold him one and he returned to his seat. Now, feeling in a slightly sarcastic mood, I then said "The toilet's vacant now sir, I thought you were in a desperate rush to get there, or has the urge suddenly gone?". The male just went red, and the rest of the commuters were sat there in fits of laughter. This male was a businessman in a smart suit.

d) People who buy discounted tickets and are unable to produce a railcard.


People who get on to buy on board, and will do so without hassle, I do not count as fare dodgers. Those that deliberately seek to avoid payment of the correct fare by pretending to be asleep, looking out of the window, ignoring you, buying railcard tickets they are not entitled to use etc etc are fare dodgers in my opinion.

 

[bnm]

Another 'incident' yesterday was when I was on the train back from Euston and a couple of African-American teens got on the train at rugby to get to Nuneaton, both saw the inspector coming up and both said for everyone to hear 'I'm not paying for my ticket'

Absolutely shocking comment. Just what relevance is the ethnicity and country of birth of these alledged fare evaders?

Don't actually believe the comment really. How many young Americans would knowingly board a train in a foreign country without a ticket and then loudly profess that they have no intention of paying?

Or perhaps it is more likely from you ill-founded comment that you didn't actually mean American.

That comment allows me to form an opinion of you rather than the passengers you commented on.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The ethnicity is relevant to many of us working in revenue protection/collection.... It amazes me how few of our pax are black, yet what a high proportion of fare dodgers are black.

Dangerous comment to make without backing it up with some hard statistical evidence.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Agree totally bnm. Ethnicity should not and should never come into deciding who is criminal and who isn't.

 

[radamfi]

I didn't realise gripping was the railway equivalent of 'stop and search'.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Agree totally bnm. Ethnicity should not and should never come into deciding who is criminal and who isn't.

Well said. Ethnicity, age, colour, creed, religion etc etc are completely irrelevant and I can assure you, working through some very mixed areas and seeing all sorts people from all sorts of backgrounds, it is impossible to generalise in this way.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The ethnicity is relevant to many of us working in revenue protection/collection.... .

I don't find that at all. What a complete load of tribe, and to be honest, down right insulting and offensive.

 

[Nick W]

d) People who buy discounted tickets and are unable to produce a railcard.

So was I fare dodging the time I accidently picked up the wrong ticket wallet, realised on the train but wasn't checked, and then paid the excess at Kings Cross?

 

[RJ]

The ethnicity is relevant to many of us working in revenue protection/collection.... It amazes me how few of our pax are black, yet what a high proportion of fare dodgers are black.

Err who's us? I wish to distance myself from unprofessional, prejudicual individuals such as yourself who come out with such tripe. I work in London, an area which is very multicultural - clientele coming from densely populated towns a few miles away and from the leafy suburbs further out. There isn't any particular abundance of fare evader from any ethnicity, age group or profession that I've noticed.

Obviously you're entitled to your own views, but don't act like you're representing revenue protection staff collectively when you come out with such BS.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

So was I fare dodging the time I accidently picked up the wrong ticket wallet, realised on the train but wasn't checked, and then paid the excess at Kings Cross?

Perhaps not in that case, no. BUT, in general, the number of people with Y-P discounted tickets who cannot produce a railcard is higher than you think. They normally always claim to have left the railcard at home, and normally always have tickets either purchased online or at an sstm. It is not uncommon to have 4 or 5 on each 3 car train on a busy train, sometimes more. I find it hard to believe that so many people buying Y-P card discounted tickets online or at an sstm all manage to leave the railcard at home compared to any other group of people.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

So was I fare dodging the time I accidently picked up the wrong ticket wallet, realised on the train but wasn't checked, and then paid the excess at Kings Cross?

Ha! You do know how to construct a good question, Nick!

Well, of course the common-useage terms 'Evasion' and 'Dodging' will not apply because a) it was an innocent error, and b) you corrected/compensated for it at an early opportunity.
However, (and without going into the differences between Penalty Fares areas and elsewhere, nor crucially, what was in the 2 wallets), you would not have been in posession of a valid ticket. That is the S.18 Byelaw offence. So you would have been subject to questionning leading, to an offer to buy a ticket 'for immediate travel', to an excess or to consideration for prosecution.

If we knew what was in the 2 wallets and whether it was on a PF train/in PF areas, then we could be more precise (and so it may have been a S.17 Byelaw Offence, but I think you already know the answers!).

 

[All Line Rover]

Err who's us? I wish to distance myself from unprofessional, prejudicual individuals such as yourself who come out with such tripe. I work in London, an area which is very multicultural - clientele coming from densely populated towns a few miles away and from the leafy suburbs further out. There isn't any particular abundance of fare evader from any ethnicity, age group or profession that I've noticed.

Obviously you're entitled to your own views, but don't act like you're representing revenue protection staff collectively when you come out with such BS.

Very true, in London you can see that there is no particular "type" of people who evade fares more than others. Just the general "yobs" who always annoy me (and they're rarely foreign!).

One thing I've noticed, though, is that many foreigners who work in London have never been to other places in the UK! As a matter of fact they've never been outside the M25! (Apart from on a plane.) I find it most surprising. You talk to them and tell you where you're from (such as Manchester), and they say: "I've heard of the place, but never visited. I'll have to go some time." ) (It's only 2 hours away by train! )
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another 'incident' yesterday was when I was on the train back from Euston and a couple of African-American teens got on the train at rugby to get to Nuneaton, both saw the inspector coming up and both said for everyone to hear 'I'm not paying for my ticket'.

Absolutely shocking comment. Just what relevance is the ethnicity and country of birth of these alledged fare evaders?

Don't actually believe the comment really. How many young Americans would knowingly board a train in a foreign country without a ticket and then loudly profess that they have no intention of paying?

Or perhaps it is more likely from you ill-founded comment that you didn't actually mean American.

That comment allows me to form an opinion of you rather than the passengers you commented on.

I'm not sure if he really implied what you're all thinking!

You could just as easily say: "A group of Liverpudlians got on the train at Rugby, a group of French kids got on the train at Rugby, a group of football supporters got on the train at Rugby, a group of Liverpudlian football supporters (!) got on the train at Rugby..."

 

[1V53]

I expected the "politically correct" brigade to jump up and down, and amusing those 'holier than thou' types here quick to insult my statements of fact as 'bull****'.

I've worked a line from Chester to Birmingham for many years. The likes of Cheshire and Shropshire have relatively few black/Asian residents but it is amazing how many fare dodgers are black. It also amazes me how many sigh or huff and puff when asked for their ticket, something I don't see from white people very often.

Clearly I can't give statistical evidence being as I would have to count every passenger and log it, a ridiculous suggestion. However I have found many colleagues commenting on the same point.

It's fact. It's my experience, and others. No it may not be national but it sure as heck is the case on that line.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

It's fact.

No it isn't. It's rhetoric. It's opinion. It's semantics. However, it certainly isn't fact.

 

[mumrar]

Just worked the 20:52 New Street to Leicester and between New Street and Coleshill Parkway I took £140 in revenue. A multitude of excuses from a full range of ages and ethnicities. Three wanted to buy with 16-25 cards, none of them did. One paid £8.50 with 2x£1 coins and the rest 20p and 10p. His mate didn't look impressed when he got it as change. He said "I don't want all this" to which I replied "Nor do I, and you've given me the perfect opportunity to get rid of it". Had a couple of cards that had to be authorised manually (Visa Debit is really annoying me now) and a couple of Daytripper tickets for Nuneaton, I think not.

 

[1V53]

No it isn't. It's rhetoric. It's opinion. It's semantics. However, it certainly isn't fact.

Ah so myself and many colleagues are imagining it then? Week after week we get trains with around 5-10% black people and more than half the fare evaders are black? No mate, it's fact.

 

[All Line Rover]

No it isn't. It's rhetoric. It's opinion. It's semantics. However, it certainly isn't fact.

Oh come on "1V53" is entitled to his opinion, it is what he has experienced (your experience may be totally difference), and as long as "1V53" treats everyone equally in his job as a guard then that's fine. There's no need to get into an argument!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Oh come on "1V53" is entitled to his opinion

So you're agreeing with me that it isn't fact? Thanks!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ah so myself and many colleagues are imagining it then? Week after week we get trains with around 5-10% black people and more than half the fare evaders are black? No mate, it's fact.

No, it's your opinion.

 

[Ticket Man]

Originally Posted by 1V53
The ethnicity is relevant to many of us working in revenue protection/collection.... It amazes me how few of our pax are black, yet what a high proportion of fare dodgers are black.

Err who's us? I wish to distance myself from unprofessional, prejudicual individuals such as yourself who come out with such tripe. I work in London, an area which is very multicultural - clientele coming from densely populated towns a few miles away and from the leafy suburbs further out. There isn't any particular abundance of fare evader from any ethnicity, age group or profession that I've noticed.

I agree. 1V53's comments are complete rubbish and do not reflect in any way how my colleagues and myself approach revenue protection. Indeed the only part of my job involving ethnicity is when I take a description of an offender.

To 1V53, I'm not sure how long you have been in Revenue protection but when we spend our days publicly making decisions that customers do not like/agree with, the last thing our industry needs is to make such a public faux pas as the comment you have made.

You never hear about RPO/I's that are good at their jobs, you hear about bad ones all the time!

 

[All Line Rover]

So you're agreeing with me that it isn't fact? Thanks!

I'm not saying whether it's fact or not, I'm saying that it's his opinion based on his experience. In the same way, I'm not saying whether your comments are fact or not, but they are your opinion based on your experience.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

What 1V53 is doing is this: black = criminal, white = fine. I personally find that disgusting.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not saying whether it's fact or not, I'm saying that it's his opinion based on his experience. In the same way, I'm not saying whether your comments are fact or not, but they are your opinion based on your experience.

1V53 is entitled to his opinion, but as long as it stays like that, and he does not pass his prejudices' off as fact.

 

[All Line Rover]

What 1V53 is doing is this: black = criminal, white = fine. I personally find that disgusting.

I'm sure that he still gets many white fare evaders!