Father who bought first-class ticket fined £484 - for getting on the wrong train

[najaB]

To quote you from earlier, that isn't what I said. Though it's what you wanted to read.

You have twice said that it's unlikely for a gateline staff member to say that they never give permission because you've seen it done on TV.

 

[sefton]

You have twice said that it's unlikely for a gateline staff member to say that they never give permission because you've seen it done on TV.

I have, haven't you?

Your previous commitment also seemed to recognise that some train companies don't in "normal operations" which I presume means others do (and those that don't do in abnormal operations).

As I have also said before I have personally experienced being given verbal permission on a number of occasions.

Therefore to deny verbal permission is ever granted is not very realistic.

 

[6Gman]

Unless I'm missing something the version given by the passenger in the OP makes no reference to any conversation but simply that they were "waved through" by an "Inspector". Does a physical gesture - perhaps without a ticket even being proffered? - constitute "permission to travel"?

 

[najaB]

Therefore to deny verbal permission is ever granted is not very realistic.

But the question being asked isn't "Is verbal permission ever given by anybody in the railway industry, ever?" The question being asked is "Did you give verbal permission?" To which the answer, quite legitimtely, could be "No."

 

[sefton]

But the question being asked isn't "Is verbal permission ever given by anybody in the railway industry, ever?" The question being asked is "Did you give verbal permission?" To which the answer, quite legitimtely, could be "No."

It could if that particular member of staff had never granted permission.

However we are discussing the usual situation, not the one theoretical member of staff out of thousands that probably doesn't exist.

 

[najaB]

However we are discussing the usual situation, not the one theoretical member of staff out of thousands that probably doesn't exist.

So, you are suggesting that a magistrate should ignore the sworn testimony of a witness saying that they didn't do something because "I saw someone on TV do it"?

 

[sefton]

Not at all.

However I think the barrister might strongly question a member of staff who claimed never to have given permission, despite being unable to recall this event and differing evidence being given by the accused.

The magistrates would then have to use their experience as to whether they preferred the testimony of the (unusual) member of staff who cannot recall the event or the accused.

 

[jon0844]

Some TOCs now ask staff not to give permission for things that can make things hard for other staff, and I would find it hard to believe staff would say you could use a ticket on the wrong train.

It seems odd that you'd even ask a member of staff that question as you'd expect to be told no, unless of course you just asked a question that didn't have anything to do with the ticket. Is the next train to X? Or something.

 

[BanburyBlue]

Blimey - what a thread!

Surely all this depends on what was said at the barriers? So did the chap say "is that the next London train", or did he say "is that the next London train? Can I travel on this ticket which is for the later service"? Being a lawyer he should be intelligent enough to read the small print - it is fairly clear that you should only travel on your booked service. But, for most members of the general public, fares rules and regulations are a mystery, so if told by a member of staff (assuming he was honest about having an advance ticket) would give them the impression of 'permission to travel'.

And is this a strict liability offence? If it is I thought he wouldn't have a leg to stand on? It's like driving with no insurance - someone can cancel your policy without letting you know, and you're still guilty of driving without insurance.

 

[gray1404]

The situation with train travel is there is a lot more responsibility placed on the traveller compared to other modes of public transport. Travel by air you need a boarding card to be on a specific flight (if you were to end up on the wrong plane then the airline would certainly be at fault), boarding a ferry is similar and I have always had my ticket checked before boarding a coach. Even getting on the bus the driver should, in theory, check the ticket is valid. The train however is a mode of travel whereby one only encounters a full ticket check once on the train in the middle of their journey.

Barrier checks are also not foil proof. Just because the barrier opens doesn't mean that the customer has the right ticket or is on the right train. Manual barrier checks vary from a full check to being waved through if you have something of a ticket, being waved through if you don't, being given incorrect information or being told your valid ticket is invalid.

 

[nanstallon]

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Does rail travel need to get so complicated; I appreciate that people who have bought cheap train specific tickets shouldn't get away with using a different train, but surely the penalty could be restricted to paying the difference between the fare paid and the fare (as at the time of the original booking)

for the train he did travel on?​

Simpler to just jump in the car and go!

 

[sefton]

It seems odd that you'd even ask a member of staff that question as you'd expect to be told no

You might expect to be told that you cannot travel on an earlier train, but what is the harm in asking.

I have done it many times, not only with trains but also with flights. Sometimes you are lucky and they agree, most of the time you are not.

I was heading back from a meeting last summer from Newark. A whole bunch of colleagues had Advance tickets for a train an hour later; they asked if they could board one arriving at that moment and the train manager agreed.

I have had train staff agree to me using a different train to that booked on many occasions when trains have been disrupted. They have agreed even when it not their company's trains that are disrupted.

 

[6Gman]

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Does rail travel need to get so complicated; I appreciate that people who have bought cheap train specific tickets shouldn't get away with using a different train, but surely the penalty could be restricted to paying the difference between the fare paid and the fare (as at the time of the original booking)

for the train he did travel on?​

So how does that stop people buying the cheapest ticket and take the chance? Since there's no financial penalty under your scheme. And if their ticket isn't checked they get away with it ...

 

[6Gman]

Blimey - what a thread!

Surely all this depends on what was said at the barriers? So did the chap say "is that the next London train", or did he say "is that the next London train? Can I travel on this ticket which is for the later service"?

The point I made upthread.

We don't know what was said, but the passenger's own account - as reported - refers to being "waved through".

So, to join in the courtroom games:

Virgin barrister: So what did you do at the barrier?
Passenger: I showed my ticket and asked if I could travel on the earlier train?
VB: I see. And what response did you receive?
P: The Inspector said he would allow me travel.
VB: And that was the exchange?
P: Yes.
VB: You asked; he answered.
P: Yes.
VB: So why did your previous account refer to being "waved" through?
P: I'm sorry?
VB: Why did the Inspector need to "wave" if he had already given you verbal permission?
P: Er ... Perhaps he'd always wanted to be a traffic policeman ...

 

[sefton]

Because some people wave their hands around as they speak.

It isn't exactly uncommon to ask for directions and someone tell you and point at the same time.

 

[sheff1]

Some TOCs now ask staff not to give permission for things that can make things hard for other staff,

Which TOCs are these ?

.. and, as asking staff not to do something does not mean they actually will not (as many threads on here demonstrate), I would not find this:

and I would find it hard to believe staff would say you could use a ticket on the wrong train.

hard to believe at all.

I have been told many times that I could use my ticket on "the wrong train". I have also been told just as many times that my ticket was not valid when I was on the 'right train'.

 

[6Gman]

Because some people wave their hands around as they speak.

It isn't exactly uncommon to ask for directions and someone tell you and point at the same time.

Indeed, but this wasn't somebody asking for directions. It was somebody asking for permission which one would normally expect to require an exchange of words.

We are all groping in the dark since we weren't there but it struck me as odd that the passenger used the expression "waved through" rather than "I asked permission, and the Inspector agreed".

 

[jon0844]

One large TOC asks staff not to freely authorise travel quite possibly because of the many examples posted on here. Staff should direct people with enquiries of this nature to a ticket office, or revenue staff. The reason is that their supposed goodwill can often create major problems for colleagues later on.

I realise in this case gateline staff are revenue but of course we don't know what definitely happened here. And it might have been agency staff, who are most likely to say anything. Not that the customer has any reason to care.

During disruption you can expect discretion but I think staff should always be giving permission in writing (endorsing tickets) and verbal permission should not happen except for extreme circumstances. Like major disruption, where people are given permission to travel on any train, in first class or whatever. Situations where it would likely be well known (logged) and there would be no issues down the line (literally!)

 

[sefton]

Indeed, but this wasn't somebody asking for directions. It was somebody asking for permission which one would normally expect to require an exchange of words.

We are all groping in the dark since we weren't there but it struck me as odd that the passenger used the expression "waved through" rather than "I asked permission, and the Inspector agreed".

You can't conceive a situation where someone shows the gate line staff their tickets and says can I use these tickets on the XX:XX to Y, and the member of staff tells them it is that one over there, pointing at it.

Now to the customer they have been given permission, but did the member of staff actually hear the question.

One large TOC asks staff not to freely authorise travel quite possibly because of the many examples posted on here. Staff should direct people with enquiries of this nature to a ticket office, or revenue staff. The reason is that their supposed goodwill can often create major problems for colleagues later on.

I realise in this case gateline staff are revenue but of course we don't know what definitely happened here. And it might have been agency staff, who are most likely to say anything. Not that the customer has any reason to care.

The problem with a 'should do this' approach rather than a 'must not do this' is it always creates the possibility of exceptions.

Why should rail companies allow people on Advance tickets to travel on earlier trains; no idea, but my experience is that if you ask you may be allowed (even when no disruption).

As to the staffing, the customer doesn't have any interest in the details, only whether the person guarding the door lets them through. If they ask if they can do X and the person with the power to let them through says "yes" or waves them through, then permission granted. If that is incorrect the power to change it sits with the train companies.

 

[AlterEgo]

I appreciate that people who have bought cheap train specific tickets shouldn't get away with using a different train, but surely the penalty could be restricted to paying the difference between the fare paid and the fare (as at the time of the original booking)

for the train he did travel on ​

Not this again.

Where’s the disincentive there?

You shouldn’t travel on trains your ticket isn’t valid for. If the worst that could happen is the company charge you for the difference *only when you are discovered*, why on Earth would anyone buy the right ticket in the first place?​

 

[shredder1]

Not this again.

Where’s the disincentive there?

You shouldn’t travel on trains your ticket isn’t valid for. If the worst that could happen is the company charge you for the difference *only when you are discovered*, why on Earth would anyone buy the right ticket in the first place?​

Not this again.

Where’s the disincentive there?

You shouldn’t travel on trains your ticket isn’t valid for. If the worst that could happen is the company charge you for the difference *only when you are discovered*, why on Earth would anyone buy the right ticket in the first place?​

What you post makes sense, but some people have less devious minds, and indeed more patience, hence why this type of post will continue to appear.

 

[6Gman]

You can't conceive a situation where someone shows the gate line staff their tickets and says can I use these tickets on the XX:XX to Y, and the member of staff tells them it is that one over there, pointing at it.

Now to the customer they have been given permission, but did the member of staff actually hear the question.

Yes of course that can happen but we have no evidence that the tickets were shown or the question was asked or that the staff told them anything!

We have a passenger who says he was "waved through".

I'm trying to recall what happens at Lime Street for Virgin departures (which I use several times a year) and my impression is that, although VT staff are present, they usually don't check tickets. Given that the train generally turns round in c.30 minutes by the time they've got the passengers off and the cleaners through they generally just want to get it loaded as quickly as possible.

 

[sefton]

I'm trying to recall what happens at Lime Street for Virgin departures (which I use several times a year) and my impression is that, although VT staff are present, they usually don't check tickets.

When I have been through there have been staff at the entrances to the platforms glancing at tickets flashed in their direction.

 

[Bromley boy]

What you post makes sense, but some people have less devious minds, and indeed more patience, hence why this type of post will continue to appear.

I think you'll find the people trying to get around paying the correct fare are the people with most devious minds, hence why the suggested solution won't work!

 

[sefton]

I think you'll find the people trying to get around paying the correct fare are the people with most devious minds, hence why the suggested solution won't work!

Perhaps examination of tickets and enforcement of restrictions at the barrier would assist in sorting the deliberate (who will find a way through) from the accidental.

 

[shredder1]

I think you'll find the people trying to get around paying the correct fare are the people with most devious minds, hence why the suggested solution won't work!

Exactly! Hence the need to be more tolerant when this type of post keeps reappearing.

 

[swt_passenger]

So how does that stop people buying the cheapest ticket and take the chance? Since there's no financial penalty under your scheme. And if their ticket isn't checked they get away with it ...

This 'simple solution' gets posted every few weeks in the regular threads about advance fares, and I really do think that people just don't think it through. The suggestion was also made by someone else a couple of weeks back and rebutted by me and others around about post #53...

 

[shredder1]

This 'simple solution' gets posted every few weeks in the regular threads about advance fares, and I really do think that people just don't think it through. The suggestion was also made by someone else a couple of weeks back and rebutted by me and others around about post #53...

And they will contunue to appear, so best to either ignore them or answer in civil manner, its not difficult and saves winding people up, not everyone reads every thread on here or think things through in the same way.

 

[Bromley boy]

Perhaps examination of tickets and enforcement of restrictions at the barrier would assist in sorting the deliberate (who will find a way through) from the accidental.

Yes that would be more effective than leaving it until people have already boarded. I can only assume this is a manpower/cost issue, sadly.

Better yet time stamp advance tickets somehow so that they will not open barriers until X minutes prior to departure. I have no idea how easy this would be to engineer.

Paper tickets are likely to be on the way out over the next few years so e-tickets will hopefully make restrictions easier to enforce.

 

[Haywain]

Better yet time stamp advance tickets somehow so that they will not open barriers until X minutes prior to departure. I have no idea how easy this would be to engineer.

Impossible in the case of CCST tickets as there is no spare capacity on the magnetic strip for such coding. In any event, it would require a rework of barrier software as well and would raise many questions about how it could be reasonably enforced and communicated. Perhaps wider use of the Blackpool North system of not letting anyone on to a platform until a set (and generally rather limited) time before departure might work. However, I am not seriously proposing that.