Jumping Barrier Incident

[styles]

I can see a big flaw in that. In the motoring case, the person identified by the registered keeper has still committed an offence, which can then be pursued.

However, in the rail case, the purchaser simply buys and uses a discount ticket (child, railcard whatever) that they are not entitled to, and then when required to identify the actual user, just pretends to "identify" someone else, who *is* actually entitled to use the ticket (child relative for example), and suddenly no offence has been committed. With no further checks they could get away with this fraud for ever.

So to stop that, really you *still* need to positively identify the person who was actually stopped at the time - which is exactly what you were trying to avoid.

This isn't much different from the flaw in motoring though.

Maybe not for speeding, but say a vehicle is involved in a collision (non-reportable), and I'm required to identify the driver, but I've been drinking, I could just say my pal was driving, he'd blow 0% and the criminal aspect would disappear. Or if I was required to identify a driver for an insurance offence, I could name my pal who runs a garage. Or if I was disqualified from driving I could just name a non-disqualified driver to avoid the disqualified driving offence.

But yeah, the law would really need strengthening for this to work.

 

[Krokodil]

I think that's their point though - if you can silently flag a ticket as being used suspiciously, there's no need to confront people face-to-face and deal with potential aggro.

Except that I can't just flag every questionable child ticket on the off-chance that they might be the wrong age, asking the age of the passenger is pretty routine.

 

[DJ_K666]

I do wonder if the enforcement of train fares, (and lets not forget that fare dodging has been around as long as the railway has) might need a thorough review of how it's enforced. If the way it's done now is the best then no change but if there's a better way it might be worth a look.

 

[RGM654]

When I arrived back at my local station on Sunday one person in front of me presented something (I didn't see whether travel card or phone) to the wide gate for people with luggage and three people went through. As they walked off along the road all three seemed to be together; so apparently three friends travelling on one fare. CCTV would help to deal with that if they do it regularly.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

When I arrived back at my local station on Sunday one person in front of me presented something (I didn't see whether travel card or phone) to the wide gate for people with luggage and three people went through. As they walked off along the road all three seemed to be together; so apparently three friends travelling on one fare. CCTV would help to deal with that if they do it regularly.

How do you know all three were not on one ticket?

 

[saismee]

When I arrived back at my local station on Sunday one person in front of me presented something (I didn't see whether travel card or phone) to the wide gate for people with luggage and three people went through. As they walked off along the road all three seemed to be together; so apparently three friends travelling on one fare. CCTV would help to deal with that if they do it regularly.

This is incredibly routine, gateline staff can see that there's three tickets (dots at the bottom, assuming it's a phone) and one quick swipe through is enough to prove it. It's far easier to buy three tickets on one phone and go through the wide-aisle gate as a group than have to awkwardly scan a group through and block the smaller gates. It's unlikely to be fare evasion.

 

[Russel]

It's the middle class compliant student who let their railcard expire that's at risk on the railway. Aggressive or sneaky behaviour is rewarded.

Low hanging fruit...

Like forcing the novice traveller who accidently boarded the 12:25 rather than the 12:52 into buying a new anytime ticket.

 

[Gostav]

It’s interesting to observe the approach taken in other countries: Spain for example has plenty of heavily armed police officers and rail staff patrol trains armed with enormous truncheons.

Difficult to know whether they have more or less of an issue with behaviour, and equally difficult to compare as the norms/standards of behaviour between the countries are different, of course.

I’d rather not move the UK in that direction but, if things continue as the are, that may be where we end up.

Or, such as Japan, where many railway employees still wear paramilitary uniforms and peaked hats. The public has no objection to that.

 

[godfreycomplex]

Or, such as Japan, where many railway employees still wear paramilitary uniforms and peaked hats. The public has no objection to that.

Maybe they would do if they learned the punishment regime associated with even minor infractions from that uniform/the punitive, unsafe working culture that that uniform embodies (see Nikkin Kyoiku/the Amagasaki derailment)

 

[AlterEgo]

Or, such as Japan, where many railway employees still wear paramilitary uniforms and peaked hats. The public has no objection to that.

I wouldn’t describe Japanese railway uniforms as “paramilitary”; which ones are you thinking of?

 

[Brubulus]

It’s interesting to observe the approach taken in other countries: Spain for example has plenty of heavily armed police officers and rail staff patrol trains armed with enormous truncheons.

Difficult to know whether they have more or less of an issue with behaviour, and equally difficult to compare as the norms/standards of behaviour between the countries are different, of course.

I’d rather not move the UK in that direction but, if things continue as the are, that may be where we end up.

Crime on the railway could be substantially reduced if tickets were directly linked to photo ID, with ticket barriers and onboard staff using facial recognition, alongside CCTV in stations and on trains linked to facial recognition databases of criminals (including fare evaders) This could effectively end most fare evasion and crime on the railway if implemented properly and it would not require huge numbers of additional police officers, though in high crime areas regular railway staff could be retrained as police/security, though I would rather see Carlisle etc replaced with actual police officers, given their higher effectiveness likely outweighing the increased cost. I know that it's likely to be politically untenable since we long ago decided that not having an official ID card is much better than a substantial drop in crime.

 

[AlterEgo]

Crime on the railway could be substantially reduced if tickets were directly linked to photo ID, with ticket barriers and onboard staff using facial recognition, alongside CCTV in stations and on trains linked to facial recognition databases of criminals (including fare evaders) This could effectively end most fare evasion

How?

 

[Ivor]

Crime on the railway could be substantially reduced if tickets were directly linked to photo ID, with ticket barriers and onboard staff using facial recognition, alongside CCTV in stations and on trains linked to facial recognition databases of criminals (including fare evaders) This could effectively end most fare evasion and crime on the railway if implemented properly and it would not require huge numbers of additional police officers, though in high crime areas regular railway staff could be retrained as police/security, though I would rather see Carlisle etc replaced with actual police officers, given their higher effectiveness likely outweighing the increased cost. I know that it's likely to be politically untenable since we long ago decided that not having an official ID card is much better than a substantial drop in crime.

Unfortunately this won’t stop anyone just crashing through or pushing through the gates or as I often witnessed working Gateline climbing over the top.

 

[Meerkat]

Even a token challenge would help, if it was backed up with an offence of ‘pushed past railway staff’.
Need more cameras that are triggered by gate pushes or a staff member, flagged faces in the system, looking for patterns, and asking local plod if they know who they are (they might want something they can arrest for so they can roll them over for other stuff).
Staff and police have been neutered by rights campaigners making their life hell for physical restraint. Many of the wannabe gangster types really need to be arrested the hard way.
If we don’t put a lid on it the best ending is vigilantism, the more likely is a ‘law and order’ personality becoming the authoritarian governmen.

 

[Brubulus]

How?

If your face is linked to your ticket and ID and there is facial recognition in trains, stations and at gatelines, non ticketed passengers become incredibly obvious. Eg Bob Smith jumps the barrier at Birmingham New Street. He gets on the train to Redditch. Revenue Protection/Police are then immediately informed that Bob Smith is on the service to Redditch and this is what he looks like so they can be deployed to apprehend him, either immediately or when resources are available, with clear evidence. I would however hope at Birmingham and other major stations, full height barriers of the sort used at Airport E gates could be used alongside a police presence to prevent jumpers.

 

[AlterEgo]

If your face is linked to your ticket and ID and there is facial recognition in trains, stations and at gatelines, non ticketed passengers become incredibly obvious.

Never going to happen for loads of reasons, some political and some practical, true fantasy. There will never be this sort of panopticon.

 

[43066]

Crime on the railway could be substantially reduced if tickets were directly linked to photo ID, with ticket barriers and onboard staff using facial recognition, alongside CCTV in stations and on trains linked to facial recognition databases of criminals (including fare evaders) This could effectively end most fare evasion and crime on the railway if implemented properly and it would not require huge numbers of additional police officers, though in high crime areas regular railway staff could be retrained as police/security, though I would rather see Carlisle etc replaced with actual police officers, given their higher effectiveness likely outweighing the increased cost. I know that it's likely to be politically untenable since we long ago decided that not having an official ID card is much better than a substantial drop in crime.

As you have said there’s no requirement to carry ID in this country, a position that’s highly unlikely to change. Even if there were it’s not clear how tickets would be linked to it. If they weren’t, it wouldn’t solve anything, as someone without a valid ticket may just as easily be without an ID.

To me the issue is more cultural, and enforcement is lagging behind the cultural shift towards individualism/entitlement that appears to have taken place over the last few years.

 

[Egg Centric]

You'd need to introduce some legislation which requires ticket purchasers to identify travellers using the tickets they've purchased, like the requirement to identify a driver who gets caught speeding.

I don't see how that could work without an unreasonable amount of burden on both the ticket buyer and the ticket user. Vehicles have number plates. Now it's true that tickets have IDs but suppose you bought 20 tickets for a group making a journey - you'd need them all to take a particular ticket and you'd have to keep a record of who got what for how long? several months? I don't think it's reasonable.

(Even if it was reasonable I'd still be against it)

 

[Brubulus]

I don't see how that could work without an unreasonable amount of burden on both the ticket buyer and the ticket user. Vehicles have number plates. Now it's true that tickets have IDs but suppose you bought 20 tickets for a group making a journey - you'd need them all to take a particular ticket and you'd have to keep a record of who got what for how long? several months? I don't think it's reasonable.

(Even if it was reasonable I'd still be against it)

As you have said there’s no requirement to carry ID in this country, a position that’s highly unlikely to change. Even if there were it’s not clear how tickets would be linked to it. If they weren’t, it wouldn’t solve anything, as someone without a valid ticket may just as easily be without an ID.

To me the issue is more cultural, and enforcement is lagging behind the cultural shift towards individualism/entitlement that appears to have taken place over the last few years.

There was a system called Iproov for Eurostar until recently that did link tickets to ID and use facial recognition to provide a barrierless travel experience. If this was rolled out across the railway network (and made more seamless) it could work very well. The main issue is group tickets, you would need that person's ID to book tickets. Though I accept the easiest solution to barrier jumping, politically and practically is to properly train gateline staff and replace them with police in high crime areas, alongside gateline cameras that automatically photograph barrier jumpers.

 

[43066]

There was a system called Iproov for Eurostar until recently that did link tickets to ID and use facial recognition to provide a barrierless travel experience. If this was rolled out across the railway network (and made more seamless) it could work very well. The main issue is group tickets, you would need that person's ID to book tickets. Though I accept the easiest solution to barrier jumping, politically and practically is to properly train gateline staff and replace them with police in high crime areas, alongside gateline cameras that automatically photograph barrier jumpers.

The difference with Eurostar, of course, is that it’s entirely reservation only and everyone travelling has a passport with them.

 

[AlterEgo]

There was a system called Iproov for Eurostar until recently that did link tickets to ID and use facial recognition to provide a barrierless travel experience. If this was rolled out across the railway network (and made more seamless) it could work very well. The main issue is group tickets

The main issue with that is the domestic railway is an open network and does not work like an airport in the way St Pancras Eurostar does. The vast majority of stations are unbarriered and access to trains is unfettered. What is the benefit to the domestic railway, then?

 

[styles]

I don't see how that could work without an unreasonable amount of burden on both the ticket buyer and the ticket user. Vehicles have number plates. Now it's true that tickets have IDs but suppose you bought 20 tickets for a group making a journey - you'd need them all to take a particular ticket and you'd have to keep a record of who got what for how long? several months? I don't think it's reasonable.

(Even if it was reasonable I'd still be against it)

There will always be edge cases, as there are for identifying drivers. You have a statutory defence to the charge of failing to identify a driver if you can demonstrate reasonable diligence was made to identify the driver but ultimately couldn't.

In the (let's be honest, incredibly uncommon) event you bought 20 tickets, gave them to people without noting down the ticket number, then one person from the group travels further than their ticketed destination and nobody owns up to it, you'd have a defence.

The overwhelming majority of tickets will be for either 1 or 2 people, or families with children, at which point you're going to struggle to mount such a defence.

For what it's worth, I am not actually advocating for ticket purchaser liability to be brought in, but I do believe it would be necessary if you wanted to feasibly investigate passengers retrospectively based on silently flagging a ticket used for gate exit as suspicious.

 

[Egg Centric]

There will always be edge cases, as there are for identifying drivers. You have a statutory defence to the charge of failing to identify a driver if you can demonstrate reasonable diligence was made to identify the driver but ultimately couldn't.

You do, but the amount of effort you're supposed to put in is unreasonable in the context of tickets. Especially for corporate/charitable entities

It's much easier to justify that amount of effort for what could in worst case be multiple charges of death by dangerous driving than buying a ticket to Radlett to get out at Farringdon...

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Crime on the railway could be substantially reduced if tickets were directly linked to photo ID, with ticket barriers and onboard staff using facial recognition, alongside CCTV in stations and on trains linked to facial recognition databases of criminals (including fare evaders) This could effectively end most fare evasion and crime on the railway if implemented properly and it would not require huge numbers of additional police officers, though in high crime areas regular railway staff could be retrained as police/security, though I would rather see Carlisle etc replaced with actual police officers, given their higher effectiveness likely outweighing the increased cost. I know that it's likely to be politically untenable since we long ago decided that not having an official ID card is much better than a substantial drop in crime.

We don't live in the former east germany or the current North Korea.

 

[Brubulus]

The main issue with that is the domestic railway is an open network and does not work like an airport in the way St Pancras Eurostar does. The vast majority of stations are unbarriered and access to trains is unfettered. What is the benefit to the domestic railway, then?

It shows how the domestic railway could establish a facial recognition ID based ticket system, that could prevent fare evasion and crime, either with barriers that automatically open for ticketed passengers (at staffed stations) or flagging (at unstaffed stations), where onboard staff can then focus resources. Secondly in much of Europe ID is required to buy train tickets.

You do, but the amount of effort you're supposed to put in is unreasonable in the context of tickets. Especially for corporate/charitable entities

It's much easier to justify that amount of effort for what could in worst case be multiple charges of death by dangerous driving than buying a ticket to Radlett to get out at Farringdon...

The best way to deal with this situation is to allow the purchase of tickets without ID but any tickets purchased without ID are invalid until linked to user ID. The person buying a ticket to Radlett might very well have multiple charges of death by dangerous driving against them.

Remember ID based ticketing should on its own prevent things such as the giving of false details to railway staff while making investigations substantially easier since there could be complete personal travel records, with journeys and ticket scans recorded in a single central database. Facial recognition is already a thing on the railway in the UK and it's expansion would almost eliminate issues such as this barrier jump, while enabling a more efficient railway overall.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We don't live in the former east germany or the current North Korea.

We increasingly do - the Police are already using facial recognition tech.

 

[AlterEgo]

It shows how the domestic railway could establish a facial recognition ID based ticket system, that could prevent fare evasion and crime, either with barriers that automatically open for ticketed passengers (at staffed stations) or flagging (at unstaffed stations), where onboard staff can then focus resources. Secondly in much of Europe ID is required to buy train tickets.

Well yes, and I think we should have a similar ID system to that, but facial recognition stuff is fantasy. Class 150s with Big Brother cams scanning everyone who’s had to upload their face to buy their two stop single ticket.

 

[Egg Centric]

The person buying a ticket to Radlett might very well have multiple charges of death by dangerous driving against them.

What about people in houses. They could conceivably be paedophile murderers. Should we stick CCTV in every living room under the picture of the glorious leader?

 

[Bletchleyite]

One could argue for some benefits of names on tickets (at least optionally) because you could for instance show it retrospectively if your phone ran out of battery, as you can a Railcard. But that wouldn't presumably be quite definitive enough for enforcement, particularly as we don't have mandatory ID in the UK.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

We increasingly do - the Police are already using facial recognition tech.

Of course they are to find murderers and drug dealers on the move between countries. Not to catch Kevin from Catford short faring