Flint - London - Issue of unpaid fair notice

[rb124]

Long time lurker, first post - and in need of some advice.

On Wednesday morning I was issued an Unpaid Fare Notice on grounds of "restricted ticket".

I boarded the 08.29 departure from Crewe, arrival at Euston 10.04. My ticket was a return portion of an off peak return from London to Flint and was within the one month validity period.

My contention is that:
a) This ticket is valid for this train as the first permissable arrival into London with a Flint ticket is the 10.04 arrival at Euston.
b) As a return portion of an off peak ticket I have the right to have broken my journey or started from an intermediate station (as I did in this case).

Am I correct?

Following issue of the Unpaid Fare notice it seems I need to "dispute my liability" in writing to RPSS within 10 days. Also it states that sending this dispute does not negate my liability to pay. I think I am in the right here and therefore have no intention to pay this.

During our discussions I repeatedly and calmly asked for the guard, and then the revenue protection chap at Euston, to look up the matter in the fares manual to check my assertions but they refused (the guy at Euston spent the first 5 mins refusing to believe any off peak tickets were valid at all into Euston before 11am:roll. I was left with no option but to accept the unpaid fare notice when they radioed for the police. Again, to stress I was very polite in dealing with the matter.

Assuming I am right (?) I will be minded to complain to Virgin for the attitude of their staff too. On the train the first thing the guard did when he saw my ticket was to ask to see my driving licence to check where I lived! This then became his grounds for my "fare evasion". On my initial refusal to pay the excess that I believed was not relevant his first response was I will get the police (specifically Police) to be waiting for you at Euston! This strikes me as being well out of order. Anyway I digress somewhat and would be very grateful for advice on the facts of the ticket validity and my best course of action re letters to RPSS, and payment / non-payment at this stage.

Many thanks.
R

 

[yorkie]

Welcome to the forum!

You held this ticket: Euston - Flint SVR?

If so, then according to that restriction text, your ticket was valid at that time.

As for break of journey, it's always permitted on the return portion of any Off Peak ticket.

I'd definitely refuse to pay the unpaid fare notice!

I am more than happy to proof read a letter, but I would also send it to Virgin Trains as well as that awful, incompetent, illiterate and un-knowledgeable debt collection agency they are using.

If they had the required knowledge they would not be pursuing the matter.

During our discussions I repeatedly and calmly asked for the guard, and then the revenue protection chap at Euston, to look up the matter in the fares manual to check my assertions but they refused (the guy at Euston spent the first 5 mins refusing to believe any off peak tickets were valid at all into Euston before 11am).

Yep, that's not anywhere near as uncommon as it should be. I am not particularly surprised.

Not the first time, and won't be the last.

I bet loads of people just pay up and don't stand their ground.

I also would be asking Virgin for an 'admin fee' for your time to send the letters, and the delay and inconvenience caused, but they're usually pretty good with complaints, so see what they say in the first instance, before going down that road.

We'll make sure Virgin do the right thing, don't worry!

 

[bb21]

This is a pretty ridiculous state of affairs. Unfortunately it is not unheard of for Vermin staff to be both poorly-trained and abusing their powers.

Please complain to Vermin and RPSS as this situation need dealing with.

You can of course refuse to pay and let them take you to court. Another potentially less stressful strategy if you can afford it is to pay the UPFN, and then take Vermin to the small claims court to recover it. I would however recommend the first course of action if you are happy to deal with the constant stream of threats for court action which would inevitably follow.

I am pretty sure many forum members will be willing to help you proofread any letter you may wish to send to fight this injustice.

 

[nedchester]

LAssuming I am right (?) I will be minded to complain to Virgin for the attitude of their staff too. On the train the first thing the guard did when he saw my ticket was to ask to see my driving licence to check where I lived! This then became his grounds for my "fare evasion". On my initial refusal to pay the excess that I believed was not relevant his first response was I will get the police (specifically Police) to be waiting for you at Euston! This strikes me as being well out of order. Anyway I digress somewhat and would be very grateful for advice on the facts of the ticket validity and my best course of action re letters to RPSS, and payment / non-payment at this stage.

Many thanks.
R

I think problems on this train occurred before with North Wales to Euston tickets and less than knowledgeable TMs.

The driving licence thing is interesting. Did the TM assume that if you didn't live in Flintshire then you were fare evading?

Oh dear.

 

[rb124]

Thanks for replies. Yes it was a Euston - Flint SVR.

I intend to continue not to pay at this stage. I had a valid ticket!

Re driving licence - yes. The guard was accusing me of fare dodging on the basis of not living in Flint. The final part of the story is that on questioning me on my Liverpool address I did reveal that I had already that morning made a separate paid for single ticket journey from Liverpool to Crewe (showed him this ticket). However, as I explained to him, that was an entirely separate journey and is of no consequence to the Flint ticket question - I could have bussed, driven, trained, or walked to Crewe at any point during the past few weeks.... That is my business. Sadly my mistake seems to have been my honesty here. It seems I should have lied and said I used connecting services from Flint to Crewe and that my ticket wasnt stamped as evidently this was the answer the guard wanted to hear.

Will try and get a letter off today/tomorrow and if I get a chance copy to folk who have offered a proof read.

Thanks again.

 

[Harpers Tate]

If all that I read above is complete and correct, the member of staff in question here should be disciplined. This is, if true, totally unacceptable.

 

[nedchester]

Thanks for replies. Yes it was a Euston - Flint SVR.

I intend to continue not to pay at this stage. I had a valid ticket!

Re driving licence - yes. The guard was accusing me of fare dodging on the basis of not living in Flint. The final part of the story is that on questioning me on my Liverpool address I did reveal that I had already that morning made a separate paid for single ticket journey from Liverpool to Crewe (showed him this ticket). However, as I explained to him, that was an entirely separate journey and is of no consequence to the Flint ticket question - I could have bussed, driven, trained, or walked to Crewe at any point during the past few weeks.... That is my business. Sadly my mistake seems to have been my honesty here. It seems I should have lied and said I used connecting services from Flint to Crewe and that my ticket wasnt stamped as evidently this was the answer the guard wanted to hear.

Will try and get a letter off today/tomorrow and if I get a chance copy to folk who have offered a proof read.

Thanks again.

So you can only use such tickets if you live at the starting station!

Your address is of no consequence to what ticket you hold and the TM is a fool for thinking this. I am sure we've had incidences with certain TMs on this train before??????

Do not pay the UPN.

 

[bb21]

Oh dear.

Indeed.

If this matter does not resolve itself satisfactorily, I can sense an opportunity for a bit more bad publicity for Vermin, who clearly have not learnt their lesson from previous incidents such as this quite infamous one.

Only this time, it is even worse, and a more elementary error.

The way I see it is that it is either gross misconduct, or utterly incompetent training by Vermin. The claim by the guard is so ridiculous it borders on being hilarious.

In a way I would have liked to see police being called, who would have almost certainly given the guard a telling off for wasting their time.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I think we have to acknowledge that the guard made a mistake (if the tale is entirely as told). And that, arguably, his unwillingness to even doubt his own call, much less to actually look it up is lamentable. However, given that humans are what they are - not infallible - there ought to be a far better process in place to follow these matters - all of them - AFTER the man on the ground has escalated - precisely to cover on-the-ground errors

The key here, in my view is that, once such an incident has found its way into the clerical background - whether it be within the company itself or outsourced - that office/function MUST ALWAYS check and double-check that the (guard in this case) was correct in his judgement. And that ONLY if it is proven beyond doubt the passenger was in the wrong, should it proceed.

In all cases of doubt, lack of clarity in "the rules" or, worse, the initiator was just plain wrong, what should happen is that a letter of apology accompanied by free travel vouchers at least to the value of the disputed fare, be sent, unsolicited, to the customer.

It might then also become a matter of policy between the TOC and the staff member in question as to what, if any, procedure takes place internally.

 

[185]

I'd probably demand compensation of say £100 for the embarrassment.

As a company that spins itself above all others, they aren't short of a bob or two.

 

[RailwayDan]

Is it all possible for someone at control to check things like this in real-time? I can imagine that control do not want to hear about revenue matters, but when it causes problems like this, surely its something that could be considered.

 

[34D]

Discrimination on the grounds of National Origin?

 

[yorkie]

Is it all possible for someone at control to check things like this in real-time? I can imagine that control do not want to hear about revenue matters, but when it causes problems like this, surely its something that could be considered.

It's very easy for the guard to simply look up the restriction code in Avantix. But, if they refuse, what can you do?

It's like the other day a FGW guard refused to look at a timetable showing that there was no 1st class on a train. He just kept repeating "You have to move. You have to move. You have to move. You have to move".

There is a phrase that comes to mind, 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink'.

It is a problem that occurs in a very small minority of cases, but even a small number is too often, and many customers won't stand their ground or know how to get advice. The rail industry does need to do something about it, in my opinion.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

It's very easy for the guard to simply look up the restriction code in Avantix. But, if they refuse, what can you do?

It's like the other day a FGW guard refused to look at a timetable showing that there was no 1st class on a train. He just kept repeating "You have to move. You have to move. You have to move. You have to move".

There is a phrase that comes to mind, 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink'.

It is a problem that occurs in a very small minority of cases, but even a small number is too often, and many customers won't stand their ground or know how to get advice. The rail industry does need to do something about it, in my opinion.

In the main, in my opinion, it is down to poor training of front line staff in the first place, backed up by poor advice and instructions from some management, which ultimately reinforces the staff's opinion that they are right and the passenger is wrong.

 

[sheff1]

In a way I would have liked to see police being called, who would have almost certainly given the guard a telling off for wasting their time.

My first thought when reading the OP was that if I were in that situation I would welcome the police being called. I would even offer to call the police myself, if necessary.

So you can only use such tickets if you live at the starting station!

Last year, a member of staff working at Reading advised us that it was a criminal offence to board a train at Reading West if you could not prove you lived in the locality.

Unfortunately, when asked under what legislation this was the case they did not reply

 

[Chapeltom]

My first thought when reading the OP was that if I were in that situation I would welcome the police being called. I would even offer to call the police myself, if necessary.




Some months ago, a member of staff advised us that it was a criminal offence to board a train at Reading West if you could not prove you lived in the locality.

Unfortunatly, when asked under what legisaltion this was the case they did not reply

How would that work with return tickets?

"I'm sorry sir, you cannot board this train at Manchester Piccadilly as you don't live in Manchester. You will be committing an offence if you attempt to return home sir."

 

[sheff1]

That seems to be pretty well the situtation the OP faced here.

 

[tony_mac]

My first thought when reading the OP was that if I were in that situation I would welcome the police being called. I would even offer to call the police myself, if necessary.

Some of us would find that quite stressful. And you never know what the TM will tell the police in order to justify their attendance (see RJ v TPE 2013).

 

[sheff1]

Some of us would find that quite stressful.

Some might. I was, of course, speaking for myself when I said I would welcome it.

And you never know what the TM will tell the police in order to justify their attendance (see RJ v TPE 2013).

I believe the RJ v TPE incident was resolved in RJ's favour.

 

[rb124]

Some of us would find that quite stressful. And you never know what the TM will tell the police in order to justify their attendance (see RJ v TPE 2013).

If I hadnt been in a rush to get to a meeting I would have stuck around to see what the police made of the matter. I was also tempted to walk off but I foolishly hoped that reason would prevail. Calling the police myself would have been a smart move I have to admit.

One thought has occurred to me today. Could it be argued that if legitimately starting a journey at an intermediate station the relevant time restriction relates to that starting station, not the starting station named on the ticket? Now this wasnt what I was told but might have been a better reason for them to offer..... Their main problem was that I had begun my morning in Liverpool not Flint....

 

[Chapeltom]

As pointed out, its absolutely non of their business where you started your journey and its totally unacceptable what has happened here. This could prove to be quite embarrassing for Virgin.

 

[bb21]

One thought has occurred to me today. Could it be argued that if legitimately starting a journey at an intermediate station the relevant time restriction relates to that starting station, not the starting station named on the ticket? Now this wasnt what I was told but might have been a better reason for them to offer..... Their main problem was that I had begun my morning in Liverpool not Flint....

It depends on the restriction texts for your ticket. The restrictions on your ticket are written in terms of the arrival time in London, so it makes no difference where you boarded the service.

 

[185]

Can only assume the TM mixed up the Flint restriction with the Manchester one, which is 1130 ish. The RPI should know better.

 

[jkdd77]

I suspect the TM got the 'rules' for the return portion of a London- Flint SVR (which permit BoJ) confused with the restriction for the outward portion (which forbid it), which might explain why he was obsessed with the OP's address as "proof" that he had not started in Flint.

It's still unacceptable, though.

 

[Crossover]

On the face of it, I think this should be a fairly open and shut case in the OP's favour - incompetence at it's worst, it would seem!

I will be interested to see how this situation pans out over the coming period of time.

The final part of the story is that on questioning me on my Liverpool address I did reveal that I had already that morning made a separate paid for single ticket journey from Liverpool to Crewe (showed him this ticket). However, as I explained to him, that was an entirely separate journey and is of no consequence to the Flint ticket question - I could have bussed, driven, trained, or walked to Crewe at any point during the past few weeks.... That is my business. Sadly my mistake seems to have been my honesty here. It seems I should have lied and said I used connecting services from Flint to Crewe and that my ticket wasnt stamped as evidently this was the answer the guard wanted to hear.

Will try and get a letter off today/tomorrow and if I get a chance copy to folk who have offered a proof read.

Thanks again.

Honesty (the best policy anyway as nothing can be held against you at a later date) or otherwise, as others have said, it is of no consequence to the Flint ticket.

 

[34D]

If I hadnt been in a rush to get to a meeting I would have stuck around to see what the police made of the matter. I was also tempted to walk off but I foolishly hoped that reason would prevail. Calling the police myself would have been a smart move I have to admit.

One thought has occurred to me today. Could it be argued that if legitimately starting a journey at an intermediate station the relevant time restriction relates to that starting station, not the starting station named on the ticket? Now this wasnt what I was told but might have been a better reason for them to offer..... Their main problem was that I had begun my morning in Liverpool not Flint....

I would say absolutely not.

To go further, if your restriction is "trains scheduled to depart after 09:00" and you've broken halfway, then you need to resume on an itinerary no earlier than the first compliant on from your origin.

 

[Olympian]

if your restriction is "trains scheduled to depart after 09:00" and you've broken halfway, then you need to resume on an itinerary no earlier than the first compliant on from your origin.

Really? Surely if you've broken your journey and are resuming on another day then all you'd need to do is still comply with "trains scheduled to depart after 09:00" (and anything else in the restriction), so long as you're on a permitted route for that ticket of course. Where does it say that this needs to relate to the origin station of the return?

 

[jkdd77]

I would say absolutely not.

To go further, if your restriction is "trains scheduled to depart after 09:00" and you've broken halfway, then you need to resume on an itinerary no earlier than the first compliant on from your origin.

I disagree. It depends on the precise wording of the restriction code, but, in my opinion, if the restriction code permits BoJ and simply states "valid at or after 0900" without referencing any station, then it is valid to start short at the intermediate station at or after 0900 regardless of departure time from the station listed on the ticket.

Your interpretation would mean that a Pilning- (anywhere) time-restricted SVR which permits BoJ is wholly unusable on a weekday, and also mean that an Aberdeen- Penzance SVR is only valid to 'start short' for Truro- Penzance travel in the later evening. Such an interpretation would contravene fares regulation in relation to regulated SVRs, and, in my view, is contrary to the plain language of the restriction code.

If the wording stated "Valid on trains scheduled to depart [station name] or "origin station listed on the ticket" at or after 0900 (as some restriction codes, such as G6,

OUTWARD TRAVEL
By any train except those timed to depart the origin station shown on the ticket Mondays-Fridays between 0300 and 0914 inclusive.

then that would be a different matter entirely, and the ticket would be restricted based on the departures from that station.

 

[snail]

a bit more bad publicity for Vermin

Is your clever pun an official position of RailUK Forums or just your personal opinion? Either way, I don't think it looks good for a forum moderator to be using it.

 

[bb21]

Is your clever pun an official position of RailUK Forums or just your personal opinion? Either way, I don't think it looks good for a forum moderator to be using it.

Of course it's my own opinion and I stand by it.

There are plenty of reports of their train managers, gateline staff, and some of their management team refusing to accept valid tickets and refusing to listen to passengers' explanations. This is not contradictory to the fact that the majority of their staff do of course do a good job and I have met plenty of them as well.

For a company that thrives on self-promotion, I don't find the services offered on their trains any more special than others, and in some aspects, worse. The same applies with other aspects of a passenger's overall experience.