Is the Penalty Fares system working

[Class800]

In this case, XC stopped at Brockenhurst pre COVID and will presumably eventually do so again, so using discretion makes good sense.

If the Brockenhurst call was scheduled on that train when the customer bought the tickets and subsequently removed, it should be accepted. If it wasn't scheduled, it isn't valid unless there's a rover/ranger or season involved. But I always prefer a lenient approach to technicalities and accidental issues, but being strict on clearly deliberate avoidance of having a ticket - you can tell normally

 

[The exile]

This allows ID/addresses to be checked by officers rather than the company staff, and anyone who gives false details or runs can be arrested.

The lack of a National ID system comes into play here. Whether having one is a good idea in general or not is a different matter - but it certainly simplified the “who is this person” part of the process

 

[Ken H]

If you want to combat fraud you have to increase the chance of fraud detection. The 'have your tickets been checked' thread is depressing reading. We need to understand why guards are failing to check tickets.
Once people get used to travelling for nothing, the behavior will become ingrained.

 

[XAM2175]

The lack of a National ID system comes into play here. Whether having one is a good idea in general or not is a different matter - but it certainly simplified the “who is this person” part of the process

Yes - it's obviously not a panacea but it does seem to have its benefits in the Dutch system:

Deferred payments | Customer Service | NS

If you cannot show a valid ticket to the conductor on the train, you will be fined.

www.ns.nl

Deferred payments​

If you don't have a valid ticket in the train, the conductor or Security & Service* assistant will sell you a ticket and collect the legal fine of € 50. If you cannot pay in cash on the spot, then you will be granted deferred payment if you can provide proof of identification.

---

Increased fine for travelling without a ticket and administration costs as of 1 April 2016​

The fine for travelling on public transport without a ticket is € 50, over and above the cost of the train ticket. The € 50 fine has been imposed by the State Secretary of Infrastructure and Environment, and is the same amount for all forms of public transport: bus, tram, metro, and train. The administration costs are € 15.

Deferred payment​

If you cannot pay the fine in cash in the train, the conductor or Security and Service assistant may grant you deferred payment. To be eligible for deferred payment, you must provide proof of identification. You will then be sent a bill via aceptgiro, which you must pay within 14 days.

No proof of identification​

The Netherlands requires all persons to be able to provide proof of identification when asked. In order to be eligible for deferred payment of a fine, you must also provide proof of identification. The Conductor or Security & Service assistant are both officially special investigative officers, and are authorised to ask for your proof of identification. If you cannot provide it, the Conductor or Security & Service assistant will issue an official report, and the Railway Police may be called in to investigate your identity.

* = Security & Service (Dutch: Veiligheid & Service) is a railway staff role that combines revenue protection with a limited set of police-style powers. The closest equivalent in Britain would probably be a (hypothetical) revenue-trained BTP PCSO.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem with this is that if you've forgotten your wallet, you have probably forgotten your ID as well. Thus, you end up with the worst consequence for those who have made a simple mistake.

 

[Ken H]

The problem with this is that if you've forgotten your wallet, you have probably forgotten your ID as well. Thus, you end up with the worst consequence for those who have made a simple mistake.

An equitable system would differentiate between the forgetful, and those wilfully evading. But how you determine which of those a passenger with a ticket irregularity is would be difficult.

 

[plugwash]

I've always understood penalty fares (or the threat of penalty fares) as a tool for dealing with the "pay when challenged" crowd. If it was really about honest mistakes then there would be no need for a penalty, but it's often impractical to distinguish an honest mistake from a "pay when challenged" attitude.

 

[Watershed]

Penalty Fares are a useful tool but as others have said, some TOC'S just dish them out like candy to actual fare evaders, an old manager many years back told me "if someone actually deserves a PF then they should be MG11'd", though when the PF is increased to £100 (£50) it at least makes it more of a deterrent, particularly as under the new rules the PF will be a surcharge on top of the Anytime single. Chatting to a manager the other day it seems though that enforcement of non payment will have to go through civil courts.

As it should. The ability for TOCs to cancel Penalty Fares was never intended to be used to allow for prosecution of people who fail to cough up. The legislation has always allowed for Penalty Fares to be recovered civilly, yet I'm not aware of any TOC that has established a process to do so.

And whilst there are consequences to a CCJ, they are not nearly as serious as those resulting from a criminal conviction.

 

[DNCharingX]

No, it isn't. Making criminals of people over an expired railcard, sitting in first class, tap in/out bugs or issues, wrong ticket, etc, is not acceptable.

If there was any intent then nothing wrong there. Might want to tackle what makes people evade in the first place (exorbitant rail fares, but that's another can of worms).

But from what I'm reading here any opportunity to make money 10x or more on an unfortunate victim they will pounce - and the law lets them do that!

In terms of actual fare evasion, I hardly see any inspectors, starting to believe that it's a myth! Ha.

 

[skyhigh]

No, it isn't. Making criminals of people over an expired railcard, sitting in first class, tap in/out bugs or issues, wrong ticket, etc, is not acceptable.

But this discussion relates to penalty fares, and they dispose of the issue without any prosecution?

 

[Titfield]

But this discussion relates to penalty fares, and they dispose of the issue without any prosecution?

Exactly. A penalty fare is not a fine (in the legal sense of the word) and there is no prosecution. The matter is disposed of by way of the penalty fare.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Penalty Fares are a useful tool but as others have said, some TOC'S just dish them out like candy to actual fare evaders, an old manager many years back told me "if someone actually deserves a PF then they should be MG11'd", though when the PF is increased to £100 (£50) it at least makes it more of a deterrent, particularly as under the new rules the PF will be a surcharge on top of the Anytime single. Chatting to a manager the other day it seems though that enforcement of non payment will have to go through civil courts.

I'm fairly sure the outcome of the Government conclusion was that it was a £100/£50 supplement on top of the applicable walk-up fare that would have been sold had it been purchased before boarding, which won't always be the Anytime, so not a "double penalty" if PFed off peak. Part of that was because InterCity Anytime fares are so inflated* that twice one of those as the penalty is grossly disproportionate, and heading towards being in excess of what a Court might award in a Byelaw case.

* e.g. if Avanti did PFs, which they may well do at some point, a PF of £517 would be entirely feasible under the current 2xAnytime rule if caught in First Class having travelled from Glasgow to Euston, which is beyond excessive.

 

[Watershed]

I'm fairly sure the outcome of the Government conclusion was that it was a £100/£50 supplement on top of the applicable walk-up fare that would have been sold had it been purchased before boarding, which won't always be the Anytime, so not a "double penalty" if PFed off peak. Part of that was because InterCity Anytime fares are so inflated* that twice one of those as the penalty is grossly disproportionate, and heading towards being in excess of what a Court might award in a Byelaw case.

* e.g. if Avanti did PFs, which they may well do at some point, a PF of £517 would be entirely feasible under the current 2xAnytime rule if caught in First Class having travelled from Glasgow to Euston, which is beyond excessive.

This situation already exists to an extent today - GWR's Penalty Fare scheme extends across virtually the entirety of their network, so it's possible to be issued with a Penalty Fare from Penzance to Gatwick Airport for example, which would be £326.70 if the Anytime fare applied.

There might even be journeys where the value of a Penalty Fare could be higher still, but it would depend on whether the signage at your origin and interchange station(s) displayed the required operators' names/logos, to allow a Penalty Fare to be issued. For example a rather improbable journey from Penzance to Sheffield via Westbury, Salisbury, Woking, Wimbledon, Luton, Kettering and Leicester.

So there are a small number of journeys which do 'benefit' from this change.

 

[XAM2175]

The problem with this is that if you've forgotten your wallet, you have probably forgotten your ID as well. Thus, you end up with the worst consequence for those who have made a simple mistake.

Yes, true, though I do have to wonder how common a thing that is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, true, though I do have to wonder how common a thing that is.

I've not done it often but I've done it, it's one reason I like gatelines because they prevent me accidentally boarding without a ticket.

 

[RPI]

This situation already exists to an extent today - GWR's Penalty Fare scheme extends across virtually the entirety of their network, so it's possible to be issued with a Penalty Fare from Penzance to Gatwick Airport for example, which would be £326.70 if the Anytime fare applied.

There might even be journeys where the value of a Penalty Fare could be higher still, but it would depend on whether the signage at your origin and interchange station(s) displayed the required operators' names/logos, to allow a Penalty Fare to be issued. For example a rather improbable journey from Penzance to Sheffield via Westbury, Salisbury, Woking, Wimbledon, Luton, Kettering and Leicester.

So there are a small number of journeys which do 'benefit' from this change.

GWR'S scheme has a cap of £160

 

[Watershed]

GWR'S scheme has a cap of £160

That's good to know, although that will simply be a matter of internal policy - it doesn't affect their ability to issue a Penalty Fare for more than that (and you couldn't appeal on the basis of being issued a Penalty Fare for more than £160).

 

[Ken H]

That's good to know, although that will simply be a matter of internal policy - it doesn't affect their ability to issue a Penalty Fare for more than that (and you couldn't appeal on the basis of being issued a Penalty Fare for more than £160).

If people hear about this (tabloid press story perhaps) the reputational damage would be quite big. I think many are put off rail travel by the worry of infringing some regulation and getting a fat bill.

 

[AlterEgo]

If people hear about this (tabloid press story perhaps) the reputational damage would be quite big. I think many are put off rail travel by the worry of infringing some regulation and getting a fat bill.

The railways already have a reputation for this though. How could it be worse?

 

[busken]

I must admit I haven't travelled by train for a long time for exactly this reason. They seem to make it as difficult as possible to buy the correct ticket, or even any ticket, then penalise you at the drop of a hat. My wife recently had to reluctantly travel by train and was confused that having bought a ticket from A to B, could then only use it on one companies train, even though 2 or more covered the same trip. Fortunately, she chose the right one! I'm afraid we are from the era where you bought a ticket, showed it to the man at the gate and away you went.

 

[RPI]

That's good to know, although that will simply be a matter of internal policy - it doesn't affect their ability to issue a Penalty Fare for more than that (and you couldn't appeal on the basis of being issued a Penalty Fare for more than £160).

It was included in the consultation when expanding the former three separate PF schemes within GWR, its not merely internal policy.

 

[Starmill]

It was included in the consultation when expanding the former three separate PF schemes within GWR, its not merely internal policy.

I think that the point being made was that at any time there could be a change in policy which permits a higher penalty fare to be issued, without the requirement to give notice or undertake a consultation, because it would be lawful to do so.

In addition it's unclear that, if a penalty fare were issued against the policy and the price were higher than £160, that there would be any relevant grounds for appeal.

 

[Northernboy67]

I get a lot of I've got no money. I'll just take a fine!!!

 

[L401CJF]

Somebody I used to work with was open that he never paid on Merseyrail unless he was going to a barriered station. Given that its a £20 odd on the spot penalty fare every time he's caught, if he did a few journeys between getting caught he still made a saving.

To my knowledge he had only been PFd twice over the course of however many years and the excuse of "the machine wasn't working on the platform at Bache/Capenhurst/Little Sutton/Overpool" resulted in an "ok, just buy your ticket at the office now"!

Whilst I don't agree with it, I know for a fact this is the mindset for a lot of people all over the country and the lack of RPIs on a lot of lines doesn't help at all.

If there was a much higher chance of RPIs being about on all lines/stations (even once or twice a week) people would in theory be caught out more, meaning the logic of a fine every 20 journeys is cheaper than paying a ticket wouldn't work and it'd be better to just buy a ticket.

Just to add, I've been an on/off commuter with Merseyrail (shift dependant) for the last 5 years and a daily commuter with them for the last 3 months. In that time I've been stopped by RPIs once, and it was at one of the underground stations. Not once have I seen them down my neck of the woods in all that time!

 

[Nova1]

Somebody I used to work with was open that he never paid on Merseyrail unless he was going to a barriered station. Given that its a £20 odd on the spot penalty fare every time he's caught, if he did a few journeys between getting caught he still made a saving.

To my knowledge he had only been PFd twice over the course of however many years and the excuse of "the machine wasn't working on the platform at Bache/Capenhurst/Little Sutton/Overpool" resulted in an "ok, just buy your ticket at the office now"!

I remember seeing a BBC News article a few years ago (I can’t find it now) saying how a Thameslink commuter who had saved thousands by just paying the very very occasional penalty fare rather than buying tickets. I think the article said eventually he was caught and taken to court and ordered to pay rather a lot of money back.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just to add, I've been an on/off commuter with Merseyrail (shift dependant) for the last 5 years and a daily commuter with them for the last 3 months. In that time I've been stopped by RPIs once, and it was at one of the underground stations. Not once have I seen them down my neck of the woods in all that time!

Interestingly it used to be the case that at most stations, at least at busy times, the ticket office bloke (it always was a bloke back then) would come out of the ticket office and collect tickets for arrivals. Given that there are 8 of those per hour at most stations this is fairly impressive. They'd not be able to penalise you, but they did collect cash fares (and no doubt some would pocket them, as no tickets were issued). This stopped when PFs were introduced (not least because "paying at the other end"* was no longer acceptable).

* This common phrase meant either "not paying" or "paying when challenged". In the 90s the challenge would almost always be there as above.

 

[Haywain]

Interestingly it used to be the case that at most stations, at least at busy times, the ticket office bloke (it always was a bloke back then) would come out of the ticket office and collect tickets for arrivals. Given that there are 8 of those per hour at most stations this is fairly impressive. They'd not be able to penalise you, but they did collect cash fares (and no doubt some would pocket them, as no tickets were issued). This stopped when PFs were introduced (not least because "paying at the other end"* was no longer acceptable).

That sort of ticket collection happened under BR until they introduced the 'open stations' policy which, I think, predated Penalty Fares by quite a while.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That sort of ticket collection happened under BR until they introduced the 'open stations' policy which, I think, predated Penalty Fares by quite a while.

Merseyrail didn't* introduce such a policy until PFs came in, and rapidly rescinded it at the central Liverpool stations when they saw how much fare-dodging it was causing (for a time, when PFs first came in, all Merseyrail stations were open with only random ticket checks). Gatelines then came later in the early-mid 2000s if I recall.

* Being a law unto itself, as it fairly often is.

 

[davetheguard]

If it was really about honest mistakes then there would be no need for a penalty, but it's often impractical to distinguish an honest mistake from a "pay when challenged" attitude.

In my experience -now perhaps a bit out of date- as well as those making honest mistakes, and those dishonest types who deliberately set out not to pay (which are actually a fairly small percentage of those without tickets), are a third, larger category.

They turn up at the last minute fully intending to pay, but the trains is already running in. So they get on board, money ready to pay the Guard. But if the Guard doesn't get to them in time, they're quite happy to walk past the open ticket office at the other end without paying. Railway's fault for not coming round on the train, apparently. They're not setting out to be dishonest, because they're basically honest people, but the result is the same - they haven't paid for their journey. Yet the self same people would never dream of walking out of a shop without paying because they haven't left time to pay at the check out or till.

Prosecution is only way to deal with the serial offenders who set out not to pay; penalty fares will never work with them. They get caught too rarely.

However for the other categories of passengers without tickets, penalty fares are working if the number issued is at the least static, or ideally going down.

 

[Bletchleyite]

However for the other categories of passengers without tickets, penalty fares are working if the number issued is at the least static, or ideally going down.

Or at any level if you work out that you're getting the same income (or more) from PFs as you would be if everyone paid. You can use data collected at RPI blocks to establish that.

At that point you effectively stop worrying about it.