MG'11d by my 'favourite' FCC RPI - combined Z123 & Z456 ticket

[jon0844]

They will let you run up costs as much as possible and then settle " on the court house steps" with the aim of leaving you as out of pocket a possible.

OR just give in and admit a mistake.

Either way they will be after you!

If they do that I will consider plan b; the Daily Mail! They would love a story like this.

Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia arc via Tapatalk.

 

[WestCoast]

Extremely poor treatment from First Capital Connect. I would be writing a condemning letter sharpish.

 

[Pumbaa]

If they do that I will consider plan b; the Daily Mail! They would love a story like this.

Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia arc via Tapatalk.

Well now we know that they read this forum...!

 

[Failed Unit]

On the very pedantic point of view, where exactly did he catch you, as if it was between Hatfield and Potters Bar, it was of no concern to him about the oyster card anyway!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

@ OP - just one thing to consider - IF FCC want to try it on they will say the letter has no precedent, situations were different, it was a long time ago, rules have chnaged etc etc.

THEN instruct high cost lawyers and try to bully/scare you into giving up. They will let you run up costs as much as possible and then settle " on the court house steps" with the aim of leaving you as out of pocket a possible.

OR just give in and admit a mistake.

Either way they will be after you!

Not so.
The letter will be relevant and admissable and your solicitor would arrange to have its author called as an expert witness to defend its relevance.

A settlement immediately before the Hearing wouldn't be accepted if it left the OP 'out-of-pocket', and in such cases the offer is usually increased as it will be less than the costs applied for AFTER a Hearing.

If FCC chose to abandon the claim but the OP wished grounds to pursue FCC then I suggest Damages arising from Professional Negligence.

- - - - - -
sent from my nice old oak chair in front of the mahogany desk in the front room via my hands

 

[jon0844]

It was having left Hatfield on a fast train that was next stop Finsbury Park. Only a couple a day like that.

Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia arc via Tapatalk.

 

[W-on-Sea]

That's absolutely outrageous.

No question whatsoever that your tickets were valid. You should most certainly get full compensation for the time you were forced to waste, and for the unnecessary extra ticket you bought, and then some more too.

Disgraceful

 

[GarethW]

You may already have thought of this - but as this is obviously a personal vendetta as per your previous threads - I would carry a small portable recorder and record all future conversations with the individual.

I'd be tempted as well to institute a county court action against both the TOC and the individual (jointly and severally) with a punitive amount of damages claimed for distress and harrasment blah blah, it would certainly concentrate the mind of the individuals management.

Best of luck anyhow.

 

[Old Timer]

Jon,

I suggest you speak with a lawyer and instigate a private action for harrassment, and any one of a number of other things which I am sure they can find.

I would also now go to the media with this AFTER you have sought advice as to the suitability of this from the lawyer.

Can I come to the party when you get your substantial cheque please ? :roll:

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Do please let us know the court date.

 

[ainsworth74]

Do please let us know the court date.

Indeed, we could make a forum meet of it

But seriously I wish you the best of luck with taking down this RPI Jon.

 

[222007]

Jon although i don't always agree with some of your post's i fully agree the treatment you recieved from this chap is nothing short of disgracefull. We don't have too many zonal ticket options in my area but all my colleagues are fully aware of the rules regarding this.

It is very clear your tickets are valid and that this chap is very mis-informed. I can't imagine FCC taking it any further and would be silly to consider doing so. I know one of the managers at FCC and i know he takes pride in his work and expects his staff to do so also remaining professional at ALL times i hope this chap is not one of his staff.

Good luck with this although i cant see you needing luck to be honest

 

[Yew]

as there where prior altercations with this RPI, could conflict of interest be a valid extra layer to your defense?

 

[bnm]

Returning to a point made in the OP......

This RPI muppet initially tried to write you up for travelling in 1st Class on Standard tickets despite the service being advertised as having no 1st Class - therefore declassified.

At best, this shows up some training and communication issues within FCCs Revenue Protection department for which management should answer. At worst, if people have paid up then it is a deliberate fraud aimed at bumping up the RPI's Penalty Fares/Prosecutions figures. And maybe his commission - if FCC's RPIs are paid commission.

 

[jon0844]

I don't think they get commission, but I saw them comparing notes (quite loudly) at Finsbury Park before and figure there was some sort of bonus scheme in place - which effectively means the same thing (i.e. staff will issue as many PFs as they can). I am sure my guy has done well, hence his recent promotion.

I do wonder how many of the PFs he issued were actually not legitimate at all? I guess that's none of my business, but someone at FCC should be trying to find out. It shouldn't be hard to cross reference PFs with the details of the train and a quick check to ensure there WAS first class operating on that service.

 

[ess]

why not ask the directors on their next online forum Friday 8th July, 1pm

 

[jon0844]

I can't wait that long, but thanks for the date. I will put that in my diary!

 

[Lampshade]

I'd be tempted to try this out for myself, but I can't really afford a pair of seasons and I can't keep shuttling between Hatfield and London on the off chance I see this guy hock:

 

[jon0844]

I am not sure he would notice if you did anyway. He only likes looking at my ticket(s) in detail, taking them out of the holder etc.

For everyone else he seems to just look from a distance like most staff do moving through the train.

Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia arc via Tapatalk.

 

[gingerheid]

Hmm.

No wonder he got promoted. I imagine Wirst Capital Connect will absolutely love someone that will bring in as much (dishonestly generated) extra revenue as someone like that will.

Why are a bunch of cowboys allowed to run our railways?

 

[ess]

Hmm.

No wonder he got promoted. I imagine Wirst Capital Connect will absolutely love someone that will bring in as much (dishonestly generated) extra revenue as someone like that will.

Why are a bunch of cowboys allowed to run our railways?

If I was that RPI's manager, I'd be questioning why he spent 3 hours collecting about £20. After paying his wages, FCC made a net loss.

 

[Ferret]

If I was that RPI's manager, I'd be questioning why he spent 3 hours collecting about £20. After paying his wages, FCC made a net loss.

Well, they have made a net loss because Jon would appear to be in the right - so he's wasted 3 hours interviewing and probably another 2 hours typing for no reward.

But, let's just pretend that Jon is in the wrong for a moment. He wouldn't be getting PF'd and he's admitted he's used those tickets for quite a long period of time. So, pretending that the combination of tickets was invalid, FCC would be entitled to demand Jon reimbursed them for all those journeys. That would come to a lot more than a 20 quid penalty fare I can promise you.

Of course, this is a pretty frivolous argument as this case is only going to end one way - in Jon's favour, but to give you some idea, at the TOC I work for, RPIs have invested time and effort into lengthy cautions, uncovered serious wrongdoing and secured 4-figure settlements to the TOC for fares owed on several occasions! Remember - an MG11 will usually end up in Court, and not with a penalty fare....

 

[jon0844]

I would hope more RPIs were out checking for irregularities than giving cursory glances from a distance, so I don't have a problem with that - but staff need to be 100% sure they've found an irregularity before proceeding 'on the off chance' or out of vindictiveness.

He'd been shown a copy of the letter from FCC saying it's okay to travel with that exact combination (albeit from St Neots and not Hatfield) and even heard at least one member of staff (ticketing) saying it was okay before she was told not to speak to me.

Now, this morning, I had another RPI at Hatfield saying the RPI was actually right as Alexandra Palace is in Z3 and New Southgate is Z4, meaning I have no ticket between the two stations. I don't think some staff understand the concept of a zonal system, meaning I'm covered for the zonal area - not the last station within that zone.

Once again I was told that I need a ticket to cover the two zones.. but a BZ3 to BZ4 doesn't exist and if it did, it would be free!

But other staff did state it's fine as I have coverage of all six zones and the border is actually an imaginary line. I think that I will soon have asked every single FCC employee, which is quickly revealing a lack of knowledge. Even if I was wrong (which of course I am not) there would be the issue of the other staff that agree with me being wrong too!

I am too busy today to finish my letter, but it will be sent out tomorrow without fail.

 

[DarloRich]

Not so.
The letter will be relevant and admissable and your solicitor would arrange to have its author called as an expert witness to defend its relevance.

A settlement immediately before the Hearing wouldn't be accepted if it left the OP 'out-of-pocket', and in such cases the offer is usually increased as it will be less than the costs applied for AFTER a Hearing.

If FCC chose to abandon the claim but the OP wished grounds to pursue FCC then I suggest Damages arising from Professional Negligence.

- - - - - -
sent from my nice old oak chair in front of the mahogany desk in the front room via my hands

I didnt say it was legal to do that! - it just what i have done in a previous life to make similar things go away!

 

[RPI]

If all what you say is true OP then I feel that this so called RPI needs a kick up the rear end and full re-training, infact, I wont call him an RPI because I am an RPI and refuse to be put in the same category as this numpty!

I hope you get a satisfactory result on this.

FCC do seem to have a bit of a reputation for being the "hard boys", part of the problem is having all services DOO, meaning that they are probably pressured to be extra hard as there are no regular ticket checks on their services by conductor's.

I expect that you will not hear a peep from FCC on this one, but if you are right then go right to the top (I.e. Tim O'Toole).

I'm not over familiar with Zonal tickets as I very rarely work with them so I cant make head nor tail of the initial incident!

Good luck chap!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I am too busy today to finish my letter, but it will be sent out tomorrow without fail.

Make sure you send it by Special Delivery, not Recorded. Only SD offers full tracking en route. Recordeds get put in with the ordinary post for the transmission stage ( and hence are just as vulnerable to loss in the post ); they are only scanned at the point of posting and the point of delivery.



PS You have a PM...

 

[Wolfie]

I would hope more RPIs were out checking for irregularities than giving cursory glances from a distance, so I don't have a problem with that - but staff need to be 100% sure they've found an irregularity before proceeding 'on the off chance' or out of vindictiveness.

He'd been shown a copy of the letter from FCC saying it's okay to travel with that exact combination (albeit from St Neots and not Hatfield) and even heard at least one member of staff (ticketing) saying it was okay before she was told not to speak to me.

Now, this morning, I had another RPI at Hatfield saying the RPI was actually right as Alexandra Palace is in Z3 and New Southgate is Z4, meaning I have no ticket between the two stations. I don't think some staff understand the concept of a zonal system, meaning I'm covered for the zonal area - not the last station within that zone.

Once again I was told that I need a ticket to cover the two zones.. but a BZ3 to BZ4 doesn't exist and if it did, it would be free!

But other staff did state it's fine as I have coverage of all six zones and the border is actually an imaginary line. I think that I will soon have asked every single FCC employee, which is quickly revealing a lack of knowledge. Even if I was wrong (which of course I am not) there would be the issue of the other staff that agree with me being wrong too!

I am too busy today to finish my letter, but it will be sent out tomorrow without fail.

my bold and italics

For God sake this is truely pathetic! Have any of these morons even looked at the London zonal map? The boundary of Zones 3 and 4 lies between the two stations mentioned and you have tickets which cover you to the boundary on each side!

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/oyster-rail-services-map.pdf

Perhaps FCC need to be reminded of this (from the TfL website):
"Travelcards allow you to make as many journeys as you like within the zones covered by your Travelcard on
- Tube, DLR, London Overground and National Rail* services within the zones covered by the ticket
- All London buses in all zones
- Trams if it includes Zones 3, 4, 5, or 6

You can also get 1/3 discount on Scheduled boat services if you have a Travelcard.
* National Rail services in London (excluding Heathrow Connect services between Hayes & Harlington and Heathrow, on Heathrow Express and on Southeastern High Speed services between St Pancras International and Stratford International)"

The text covered by my bold and italics is key; you have two Travelcards as permitted by NCoC as has been noted earlier - these cover all London Zones you have been travelling in. I imagine TfL would have some little issue with any attempt by FCC to rewrite the rather well established Travelcard rules!!!

I suggest you sue FCC for all of your time and both the company and its at best incompetent and at worst malevolent and incompetent employee for harassment.

In fact, on the latter point, have you considered approaching BTP to lodge a formal complaint for harassment against that individual? The individual in question can hardly claim to be merely doing his job when you have a letter from his employer clearly stating that what you are doing is wholly permitted!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I am too busy today to finish my letter, but it will be sent out tomorrow without fail.

I'm very puzzled by this remark.

What is the point of your letter? Have you considered the likely responses, where they would leave you, and how you will respond to each of them, with an assessment of the likely outcomes of each? And are you satisfied that these assessments lead you, on balance, to believe that your result will be the best possible result?

I'm equally puzzled why you want to write a letter at all. Its barely a couple of days after having taken the opportunity (and apparently a willingly taken opportunity) to make a lengthy Statement to the Company under a formal caution and to have it witnessed. Has something radical changed to the extent that your outcomes are improved by adding an informal letter before your Witness Statement is fully assessed? Do you wish to change something in your Witness Statement? (If so, take legal assistance).

Are you absolutely sure that it is beneficial to be writing any letter at all at this stage?

 

[jon0844]

Are you serious?

I am not writing a letter to change my statement or ask for any information about the MG11. When they check up and see my 40-50 answers stating I had a Z123 and Z456 ticket, they'll probably facepalm and tear it up.

So, if they just bin it and pretend it never happened (I have no paperwork or evidence, besides a photo, that anything ever happened) what then? I hear nothing, know I 'won' but the RPI doesn't. He'll assume he was right. No apology, no letter to stop him doing it all over again.

He's been going after me for over a year. I hadn't seen him for ages and thought he'd left/been sacked/moved to another TOC but then he turns up in his new 'fraud' role and now he's looking for ticket irregularities. Great idea giving the job to someone who didn't even know about ticket extensions.

Do you think I was going to get him to write everything down after being there for 3 hours, and without the opportunity to check further details and get confirmations? I said everything I needed to say, over and over again. He wrote every word of it down and I signed it.

I am not writing to the legal people about my alleged fraud, but about this RPI and now the lady at the ticket office who was the rudest and most patronising person I've met in quite a while - and totally wrong (you do not need a single ticket to travel, and you can combine tickets on the 'railway' not just the underground). She's a supervisor? God help us all.

 

[Old Timer]

Jon.

I think at this stage I would be looking to legal advice as to how to move forward. A letter however well intentioned may be better laid from a lawyer.

Just a thought.