How much fare evasion is there and are barriers the way to go?

[yorkie]

... an independent appeals process...

who runs it? not SET any more?

 

[Helvellyn]

Penalty Fares are a useful way of trying to ensure people do not deliberately travel on a short ticket i.e. just to get through the barriers at each end! We still need onboard staff/checks, though to ensure that First Class is not abused, that bye laws and seat reservations are enforced, and that information or assistance is available. We also need good ticket office availability to ensure that people don't have the chance to use their excuses.

SWT's policy is that Commercial Guard's still patrol trains, check tickets, etc. After the staff cuts earlier in the year some effort is being put into increasing Revenue staff working trains again too. Ticket Offices are more contentious! Making sure they are manned when they should would be a good start. But SWT and other TOCs should do more to promote what else is in place. Over 50% of ticket sales are via TVMs, but many still feel a reluctance to use them. More education would be good. The Help Points and Customer Service Centre also seem poorly advertised, as passengers can talk to someone, even if not face to face. It's about trying to get a balance between all aspects and from experience SWT was good at this, though staff cuts due to the recession have hit that.

Anyone trying to jump the barriers should be prosecuted for fare evasion, as what else could tey be trying to do? (apart from being armed police chasing a suspect).

Anyone refusing to use the barriers should also be reported. It is a bylaw offence! Ticket gates also encourage fraud (though the net benefit remains more people have tickets) and this is again why Revenue on train are needed to look for short tickets and sandwich tickets.

I'm not sure how PF's work in practice, as I don't live in a PF area, and didn't work in one when I was in the booking office. Can RPI's not ask for details anyway, and don't passengers have to provide them if requested?

Well yes, if asked, a passenger is required to provide their name and address to a member of railway staff. But the Penalty Fare rules stipulate that if the passenger is willing to pay the Penalty Fare in full at the time, then they are not required to give any details. It is why RPIs are better than RPAs, as the former on SWT have the ability to caution a passenger and then they use their PACE training. A good RPI can get a situation under control by using their warrant badge correctly.

It's good to know that good RPI's make a decision based on any evidence/explanation provided!

RPI, RPA or Commercial Guard - all should do that if they are doing their job correctly. Robustness and assertiveness are required to do the job well, as well as the ability to show empathy and to know the meaning of discretion! Revenue Protection is a hard job, and in many ways a thankless one. A significant minority on the railway dislike Revenue staff, yet they are usually a very good group of people.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

who runs it? not SET any more?

I take it that you are suggesting that the fact that IAS is a subsiduary of SouthEastern Railway means it's not independent? The rules of a Penalty Fares Scheme are very clear on the fact it is independent, and the process that must be followed.

A lot of TOCs now use IRCAS, which is a private company based in Petersfield. But they are no more or no less independent than IAS in Portsmouth.

 

[blacknight]

They seem to cope with 15-20 minute intervals throughout the rest of the journey, does that mean the train is unsafe then?

If guards are now routinely not checking tickets on the trains then it leaves the system just as open to abuse as before.

Safety always comes before revenue protection guard as to be in set position for dispatch so you could be 10 minutes into ticket checks & you have to get inplace for next station stop
From departing KGX-PBO gives 45 minutes for full ticket check to be made so in theory long distance travelllers are likely to get their tickets checked then, do another full check after York stop gives another 30 minutes for majority of tickets to have been checked.

I was musing about how partial checks do allow some people to abuse it, but don't know what you can do about it.

I really don't get what point you are trying to make. I was saying that the barriers seems to encourage guards not to check tickets, which makes it easier to evade fares.

Surely if barriers either manned or automated gates are in operation something as been done about cutting down on revenue being lost & job of checking tickets as been carried out already, anyway from Dar-Dur-NCL its only local fares that are being lost & as you say yourself partial checks dont work as you are reliant on fare evader coming forward.

You seem to disagree with that, and think that guards shouldn't have to bother themselves checking tickets, then complain that it is easy to evade fares?

I was making the point that its passengers who swing both ways over ticket checks come through a manned barrier & they will say "do you know how many times my ticket as been checked today" but should it appear no ticket checks have been carried out they soon let you know.

 

[Greenback]

I don;t care how many times my ticket is checked, it means there is more chance people have the correct ticket! I never mind going through barriers or gates, as long as there is a wide gate for luggage, but they are not not suitbale or cost effective for every location.

In an ideal world, there would be 'ticket checkers' as well as guards on busy services, so that more ticket checks could be made. Of course, this will cost more money and TOC's will probably say that the extra cost is not justified in terms of revenue currently lost. Even with more anti fare evasion measures, the determined thieves will probably still get away with a lot, it's probably impossible to eliminate it completely.

It needs to be made more of a social stigma though, in my opinion, like smoking and drink driving. That agian would cost money, and take a great deal of time!

 

[tony_mac]

I was making the point that its passengers who swing both ways over ticket checks come through a manned barrier & they will say "do you know how many times my ticket as been checked today" but should it appear no ticket checks have been carried out they soon let you know.

Well, yes, people do that sort of thing, it's human nature. It doesn't mean you should stop checking tickets, though.

I was actually on TransPennine trains, so 15-20 minutes is about normal for them.
If you don't check tickets on the trains, people will be tempted to re-use them, even if they wouldn't normally try and evade fares. The barriers obviously help in this respect, but they don't visibly mark the ticket, and many people will start / end their journey at unbarriered stations (and quite likely to have outward tickets valid for 5 days in the north as well).

I would have thought that it would be better if barriers were used with on-board checks, not as a reason to stop the checking on-board.

 

[jon0844]

I didn't know that paying the penalty fare in full meant you didn't have to give your details? If this is true, no wonder some people simply whip the £20 out and hand it over without any fuss.

I thought guidelines stated that after 3 PFs, you'd be reported, but if no details are taken then it sounds to me like you'd be onto a winner by volunteering the PF without fuss and smirking over the number of times you get away with it.

 

[Greenback]

Which seems to be another big weakness of the current PF legislation! It should be compulsory for details to be entered on the PF notice, and these can then be added to a database. As the government seems to love colecting information, they should support it!

 

[jon0844]

The problem is that people don't seem to think there's a problem in fare evading. If you can get away with it, why wouldn't you do it? Nobody seems to see it as a crime, and it's just taking advantage of a situation.. I was going to say that nobody would go shoplifting just because they could get away with it, but then I read that more people ARE doing just that.. even supposedly law-abiding 'middle classes'.

I remember when ex-colleagued boasted about putting in false insurance claims because they deserved something back for the money they paid (it's harder to do that now, but I am sure thousands still try every day) and it shows what is wrong in society that it's seemingly okay to rip off large companies as there's 'no victim'.

Goodness knows how you'd ever make it on par with drink-driving (which is also increasing thanks to the reduction of police on the streets). Society seems to suggest that it's not only tolerable to do it, but is something to be proud of. At a recent fireworks display, people were dodging the volunteers collecting the £5 admission fee - which was all for charity (it wasn't a display where this was voluntary). Why would you seek to evade paying the admission even when it's for charity, and then brag about how you didn't pay to get in?

 

[Greenback]

I think what you outline are the symptoms of a breakdown in a sense of community and society. Isn;t Margarte Thatcher supposed to have said 'There's no such thing as society, only the individual' or words to that effect? Don't know if she ever did though!

It sounds like a cliche to me now, but in my parents and grandparents day everyone worked near where they lived, often worked with their neighbours and knew everyone for streets around. You wouldn't steal from the local shop, the owner was one of your own, and kids caught stealing (scrimping apples!) were given a clip round the ear and taken home for a whipping! Such things would be unthinkable now, and anti social behaviour is the price we are paying for this progress.

People also now see large companies as being, like Tesco, too big and greedy for their own good. Many people are sceptical of charities, especially those who have Chief Executives on large salay packages, nd employ sales people as fund raisers. Sadly, the smaller, genuine charities also suffer as a result.

Rant over! If I was down the pub, I think I'd now be sitting on my own!

 

[jon0844]

Rant over! If I was down the pub, I think I'd now be sitting on my own!

And when the landlord isn't looking, you'd be sneaking around to nick a packet of crisps.

 

[Greenback]

Lol! Not much chance of that in my local!

 

[Metroland]

Yes I want to see massive barriers erected, I'd like to stop as much fare evasion and possible to bring the prices down as much as possible.

 

[jon0844]

Even if fare evaders decide not to travel (so the TOC doesn't get any more money), there's the bonus of creating more space on the train - and quite possibly less trouble/damage.

So it's a win win situation.

 

[Lampshade]

I think the whole idea of putting ticket prices up to compensate for fare evasion is rubbish, it's not revenue lost, it's revenue not gained.

Although I'm 100% in support of the principle, I still think TOCs can achieve similar results by other means and they should try and exhaust all other possible measures before resorting to barriers, just my opinion. Although road-related, the precedent is set, some Police forces stopped using speed cameras and instead increased the number of traffic officers on patrol, Ladyman even said this was because they believed they could achieve in their area, similar results by other means and now other forces are following suit.

 

[ChrisTheRef]

Do you ever take a pro-active approach to fare evasion?

I did for the first time on Sunday.

Four scallies clearly looking out for the guard. They moved to the door by the toilet on a 156 when he approached. The guard didn't think to look in the doorway as the train wasn't busy.

On his way back, I just quietly said to him "there might be people of interest to you in the doorway"
They all got charged

 

[Mojo]

I think the whole idea of putting ticket prices up to compensate for fare evasion is rubbish, it's not revenue lost, it's revenue not gained.

Indeed. If someone steals a bar of chocolate from Waitrose (to steal an idea from another thread) then there is a loss to the supermarket; they cannot sell that bar to someone else but they have already paid their supplier part of the price they were going to sell it for - and thus have lost out.

The only time a similar analogy could be applied to the railways is:
a - if the train is so full that nobody can fit on (but despite what some say this is not very common)
b - added costs of having extra fuel consumption and extra wear and tear on the insides of their trains (but this is so small it's not even worth considering)
c - bad behavour by fare evaders (but how many fare evaders behave badly, and how many people does this put off using the train).

 

[Lampshade]

Aha Chris that is a very good point, does anyone actually make a stand themselves?

I very rarely encounter any fare evasion and most are caught by the Guard as it's only really Pacers and Sprinters up here. The only 'fare evasion' I've noticed is if people board at unstaffed stations and alight at unstaffed stations when the Guard hasn't been through, but that's hardly the fault of the passenger. There was one time when I was on a TPE sat near the small toilet, I said to the Guard on his way through "they've been in there quite a while", and sure enough 3 people emerged as the train was pulling into Bolton, and were duly caught

 

[ukrob]

Aha Chris that is a very good point, does anyone actually make a stand themselves?

I very rarely encounter any fare evasion and most are caught by the Guard as it's only really Pacers and Sprinters up here. The only 'fare evasion' I've noticed is if people board at unstaffed stations and alight at unstaffed stations when the Guard hasn't been through, but that's hardly the fault of the passenger. There was one time when I was on a TPE sat near the small toilet, I said to the Guard on his way through "they've been in there quite a while", and sure enough 3 people emerged as the train was pulling into Bolton, and were duly caught

Was it the Class 185 small toilet? How do you get three people in that?!

 

[Old Timer]

...Although road-related, the precedent is set, some Police forces stopped using speed cameras and instead increased the number of traffic officers on patrol, Ladyman even said this was because they believed they could achieve in their area, similar results by other means and now other forces are following suit.

THis probably has more to do with increasing revenue to the Treasury by the issue of more Fixed Penalty Notices to motorists than any genuine desire to increase safety.

 

[Helvellyn]

I think what you outline are the symptoms of a breakdown in a sense of community and society. Isn't Margaret Thatcher supposed to have said 'There's no such thing as society, only the individual' or words to that effect? Don't know if she ever did though!

It's one of those quotes where only part of it was snatched up by opponents and it stuck as a soundbite. The longer quote was actually in an interview she gave to something like Woman's Own! It was along the lines that there was people who collectively thought "society" owed them things, such as benefits, etc. Her point was that society doesn't and individuals should look to helping themselves. If I can find the full quote, it actually makes more sense in its wider context.

But it's probably best to leave the politics aside. So much better to discuss those things over a few drinks with friends!

I don't think fare evasion is something new, but then again it's maybe something that people consider more accepatable today. Yet if you're prosecuted for fare evasion you are usually prosecuted under the Regulation of Railways Act (1889) - so I guess the Victorians wanted to make sure it wasn't a problem back then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I didn't know that paying the penalty fare in full meant you didn't have to give your details? If this is true, no wonder some people simply whip the £20 out and hand it over without any fuss.

I thought guidelines stated that after 3 PFs, you'd be reported, but if no details are taken then it sounds to me like you'd be onto a winner by volunteering the PF without fuss and smirking over the number of times you get away with it.

It's in the Penalty Fare rules, and as far as I'm aware always has been. Three Penalty Fares is a rule of thumb, but you need to know the person has had that many (or more), why and in what timespan. Three in three months is different to three in five years. Even then, you ask questions to deterrmine if someone can be reported. You can't just say that "you've had three of these, so I'm reporting you."

A good RPI/RPA doesn't go straight for the Penalty Fare pad. They'll ask questions, try get details, then make a name and address check to see if: 1) the name and address are genuine; 2) if the person has "previous." Then the appropriate course of action can be taken based on all the facts.

 

[Lampshade]

Was it the Class 185 small toilet? How do you get three people in that?!

Yep it was, you'd have thought it was a TARDIS hock:

Then again there is a record for the most amount of people in a phone box, think it's 12.

On another note a thought has occurred to me. I wonder what the fare evasion statistics are for open access operators compared to franchised operators. My hypothesis is that people are more fond of OA operators because they're small, independent operators there to provide a train service for them and are therefore more likely to pay the fares; whereas the franchised operators are large, fat cat transport conglomerates there to make themselves profit and therefore 'won't miss a few quid', just a theory.

 

[Helvellyn]

Found the quote, and it was in Woman's Own: -

I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations...​

Entitlements without obligations - still many who bang on about their "rights" today!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On another note a thought has occurred to me. I wonder what the fare evasion statistics are for open access operators compared to franchised operators. My hypothesis is that people are more fond of OA operators because they're small, independent operators there to provide a train service for them and are therefore more likely to pay the fares; whereas the franchised operators are large, fat cat transport conglomerates there to make themselves profit and therefore 'won't miss a few quid', just a theory.

Plus the shorter trains, limited stop nature of the OA operators means it's probably easier to carry out ticket checks, etc. In a sense, because of their smaller size they can keep things simple. Also, as they are not the uincumbants they have much lower overheads, and much greater freedom than the TOCs in what they can do.

I wonder how much fare evasion goes on with buses too. How many people buy a ticket to stop A, but stay on to stop B?

 

[blacknight]

Well, yes, people do that sort of thing, it's human nature. It doesn't mean you should stop checking tickets, though.

I was actually on TransPennine trains, so 15-20 minutes is about normal for them.
If you don't check tickets on the trains, people will be tempted to re-use them, even if they wouldn't normally try and evade fares. The barriers obviously help in this respect, but they don't visibly mark the ticket, and many people will start / end their journey at unbarriered stations (and quite likely to have outward tickets valid for 5 days in the north as well).

I would have thought that it would be better if barriers were used with on-board checks, not as a reason to stop the checking on-board.

Reuse of tickets as always been a problem when ever possible on manned gates we have tried to retain as many used tickets as possible. Those who claimed they needed them for reciepts were either marked with a diagonal cross or clipped through magnetic strip to prevent any future reuse, plan is eventually that automated getes will retain used tickets, biggest draw back to gates is they are linked to opening hours of ticket office so when that closes gates are thrown open. personally I would like to see ticket checks on stations up to last train but accountants run the job at present they dont see that as cost effective
Fully agree that onboard checks should be carried out but it was NXEC who took travelling RPI of trains to man gates which was bit of a backward step. Have to see if theres are rethink on that decision come handover of ECML next week

 

[daccer]

The nearest i have ever come doing anything about fare evasion is to give my seat up for a couple who had reserved seats only to find them occupied when they boarded the train. When they pointed their reservations out to the women who occupied the seats they were told tough luck. The train was full and standing and the guard non-existent. I was so disgusted by the attitude of the people that I gave my seat up so the couple who had at least gone to the trouble of making a reservation didnt end up in the vestibule. I was only in the UK for a week on holiday and was frankly gob smacked that noone else said anything. The whole issue of fare evasion comes down to personal choice. If you are determined enough you will avoid paying. What is needed (as mentioned elsewhere) is more peer pressure to make fare evasion a social stigma. I have never seen anyone ever say anything when they know someone hasnt paid - why is it so acceptable to steal from the railways?

 

[jon0844]

personally I would like to see ticket checks on stations up to last train but accountants run the job at present they dont see that as cost effective

It's why accountants shouldn't have a say in business! Having secure stations, with gates to protect revenue, would probably have a marked effect on the safety/security, comfort and protection of the railway. I am sure some people who will jump on/off a train because, to them, it's free would think twice. Some wouldn't be able to travel at all. This would even have benefits elsewhere, with people roaming around the railway network causing chaos inside AND OUTSIDE the station.

At least London Overground has the right idea by staffing stations whenever trains run (I believe this is still the case?). It's not rocket science; but there's a cost that has a load of benefits that don't necessarily reward to the TOC. In theory, the staffing and security should be subsidised by other agencies.

I'm dreaming now!

 

[Greenback]

It's why accountants shouldn't have a say in business! Having secure stations, with gates to protect revenue, would probably have a marked effect on the safety/security, comfort and protection of the railway. I am sure some people who will jump on/off a train because, to them, it's free would think twice. Some wouldn't be able to travel at all. This would even have benefits elsewhere, with people roaming around the railway network causing chaos inside AND OUTSIDE the station.

At least London Overground has the right idea by staffing stations whenever trains run (I believe this is still the case?). It's not rocket science; but there's a cost that has a load of benefits that don't necessarily reward to the TOC. In theory, the staffing and security should be subsidised by other agencies.

I'm dreaming now!

It's a good dream to have and one I share!

In my opinion, too much notice is given to what accountants say, and it;s not just confined to the railway either!

 

[90019]

On another note a thought has occurred to me. I wonder what the fare evasion statistics are for open access operators compared to franchised operators. My hypothesis is that people are more fond of OA operators because they're small, independent operators there to provide a train service for them and are therefore more likely to pay the fares

Thing is though, I would say that to a lot of people an open access company's train is just another train that they can use, and I doubt that they would take into account the size of the company or whether they're franchised or open acceess, just how likely it is that they'll get caught.

 

[jon0844]

I'd think it more likely to get caught on a smaller operator (smaller trains, dedicated staff) than a 'mainstream' service where trains are all DOO and calling at really small stations where it's easiest to get on/off.

 

[Greenback]

Found the quote, and it was in Woman's Own: -

I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations...​

Entitlements without obligations - still many who bang on about their "rights" today!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Plus the shorter trains, limited stop nature of the OA operators means it's probably easier to carry out ticket checks, etc. In a sense, because of their smaller size they can keep things simple. Also, as they are not the uincumbants they have much lower overheads, and much greater freedom than the TOCs in what they can do.

I wonder how much fare evasion goes on with buses too. How many people buy a ticket to stop A, but stay on to stop B?

Thanks for finding the full quote Helvellyn!

I have seen some bus drivers around Swansea pull up passengers who have travelled further than the ticket allowed. Some, of course, can't be bothered, don't want to know or care! And some simply can't remember who bought what ticket! I was once given a rollocking by a conductor on a bus in Reading. The bus was going past the hospital, which is where I wanted to go, but it went past two of the sides if you know what I mean. I asked for Royal Berks Hospital, but wanted the further side, the conductor ticked me off and said the name of tht stop was xxxx Road and was an extra 50p! He didn't charge me though, as he could see I was genuinely confused, never having caught the bus there before!

 

[Helvellyn]

I was once given a rollocking by a conductor on a bus in Reading. The bus was going past the hospital, which is where I wanted to go, but it went past two of the sides if you know what I mean. I asked for Royal Berks Hospital, but wanted the further side, the conductor ticked me off and said the name of tht stop was xxxx Road and was an extra 50p! He didn't charge me though, as he could see I was genuinely confused, never having caught the bus there before!

I sometimes use my local Stagecoach bus service, and the stop I use is in a separate fare stage to the rest of the stops in the area I live. It's surprising how many times I'll buy a ticket, be told the price and then have to ask them if they've changed the fare stage, as it drops the price by 30p!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Reuse of tickets as always been a problem when ever possible on manned gates we have tried to retain as many used tickets as possible. Those who claimed they needed them for reciepts were either marked with a diagonal cross or clipped through magnetic strip to prevent any future reuse, plan is eventually that automated getes will retain used tickets, biggest draw back to gates is they are linked to opening hours of ticket office so when that closes gates are thrown open.

It must be either the design of the gates, or the way they've been set up. Gates on SWT, like on the Underground, will retain tickets if the journey is considered complete, i.e. it's a single or one portion of a return.

Travelcards are also retained at the station of origin if outside the zonal area (e.g. Woking to London 123456), though the passenger can ask to keep it if they're going back to London. That's because a Travelcard is valid all day, but with a combo ticket it is only valid for one return trip from the station to the zonal boundary. Tickets in that case need to be marked to show that it's no longer valid that day outside the zones. The canny ticket checkers on evening trains will look at the time of issue on TravelCards on trains into London in case someone has been given a ticket (or picked up up) at a station with no barriers to try get a free trip. Transfer of tickets - another bylaw offence.