Newspaper article regarding supposed unfair treatment regarding ticket discrepancy.

[voyagerdude220]

Couple claims train conductor verbally abused them in family railcard fiasco

A FAMILY say they are ‘disgusted’ with how they were treated by a train conductor on a journey from Durham to Manchester Piccadilly.

Jerry Groody, who lives in Breightmet, says she was ‘verbally abused’ by the Transpennine conductor, who confiscated her family railcard.

Miss Groody had been in County Durham for the weekend, visiting her mother with her five-year-old daughter Faith, and partner Danny Cunningham.

While buying return tickets, Miss Groody realised that it would work out significantly cheaper to buy a family railcard, which requires a minimum of one adult and one child to be travelling together. During their stay, Faith decided that she wanted to stay with her grandmother for a few more days, as she was feeling unwell after recently being in hospital due to asthma.

On the journey back to Manchester, Miss Groody and her partner were told that their tickets were invalid as they were not travelling with a child, despite having tickets for three passengers.

Miss Groody said: “I was told I would need to buy a new set of tickets or I’d be forced to leave the train at the next stop.

“I offered to pay the difference but the man wouldn’t accept it.....

(Sorry I don't know how to make a short link, so please could someone edit this for me?)

My thoughts on this story:
If the pax involved had a change in circumstances, which meant that they no longer had a valid combination of adults/children for their family railcard, why didn't they seek advice from ticket office staff before boarding the train?

I believe a very big cause of disputes between TOCs and passengers is passengers incorrectly assuming things, or failing to seek help from railway staff at the first opportunity. Had they gone to the ticket office before boarding the train, they would have at least had the options available to them explained by staff, before they started their journey.

I don't work for TPE, or have any bias against the passengers, but it really annoys me in scenarios like these, where people go to the media about problems they've caused themselves. I agree that it may seem silly that travelling with fewer people is deemed as a reason to charge more money for the journey, however, the passengers agreed to the terms and conditions of the railcard when they purchased it.

 

[a_c_skinner]

a very big cause of disputes between TOCs and passengers is passengers incorrectly assuming things

and some apparently illogical rules (like not alighting early using an advance ticket), different levels of service at ticket offices and on train and a commonly held position that the ticket is wholly invalid rather than needing an excess fare all of which to the traveler often seem unfair.

I have witnessed on train staff being excessively direct with paying customers in such discussions.

 

[voyagerdude220]

and some apparently illogical rules (like not alighting early using an advance ticket), different levels of service at ticket offices and on train and a commonly held position that the ticket is wholly invalid rather than needing an excess fare all of which to the traveler often seem unfair.

I have witnessed on train staff being excessively direct with paying customers in such discussions.

Fair comment, I agree with your points. More specifically in this scenario though, I can't help but question why they didn't go to the ticket office, before boarding their train, to avoid doing so with invalid tickets.
The sinic inside me thinks they deliberately avoided the opportunity to pay to correct their invalid tickets, hoping that they would be let off having to pay anything onboard, or, hoping they didn't have their tickets checked at all.

 

[mallard]

why didn't they seek advice from ticket office staff before boarding the train?

From the scant details in the article, they were returning from Durham to Manchester after spending the weekend away. Logically, it's likely that they were travelling on a Sunday evening. According to National Rail, the ticket office at Durham closes at 20:00 on a Sunday. There are several journey options that start after that; including two direct TPE services, thus, the conductor on the train could easily have been the first member of staff reasonably encountered.

 

[sheff1]

I believe a very big cause of disputes between TOCs and passengers is passengers incorrectly assuming things, or failing to seek help from railway staff at the first opportunity. Had they gone to the ticket office before boarding the train, they would have at least had the options available to them explained by staff, before they started their journey.

After staff in a TPE ticket office repeatedly accused me of lying after my tickets printed incorrectly, I do not share your confidence that staff in a ticket office would offer any advice or assistance.

 

[a_c_skinner]

There are times when the passengers seem to be treated as prisoners not customers. There is still work to do to improve the customer experience.

 

[142blue]

My thoughts? Chancers who tried their luck and hope they wouldn't get caught out.

New tickets please and you've tried to use a railcard without the correct passengers travelling.

As to wether the TPE staff were offish with them will no doubt get investigated and if they were being nasty then yes suitable action should be taken if required.

 

[gray1404]

It is really disappointing to hear that they feel there were spoken to in an unjust way. I have got to the point now whereby I prefer the way staff on board airlines treat their customers, with respect. I am not sure if it was right for the railcard to be taken off them. Paying the difference in fare would have been the best on the spot solution.

 

[Llanigraham]

It is really disappointing to hear that they feel there were spoken to in an unjust way. I have got to the point now whereby I prefer the way staff on board airlines treat their customers, with respect. I am not sure if it was right for the railcard to be taken off them. Paying the difference in fare would have been the best on the spot solution.

Since you weren't there, you only have a biased report of one side of the "conversation", so please don't make assumptions.

 

[gray1404]

I have not made any assumptions whatsoever. I have clearly stated "disappointing to hear that the they feel....." I have then spoken about my personal preference for air travel. I have then said how I am unsure if it was the right course of action to take a railcard followed by how I think the situation described could have been easily dealt with by way of an excess. There is nothing wrong with what I have posted and I have not made any assumptions.

Likewise I would say you to, please do not accuse someone of making assumptions when such a statement is unfounded.

 

[AlterEgo]

There’s obviously not enough verifiable information for any of us to make any sort of informed comment on this, beyond the fact that the customer didn’t have valid tickets.

 

[Sprinter153]

It is really disappointing to hear that they feel there were spoken to in an unjust way. I have got to the point now whereby I prefer the way staff on board airlines treat their customers, with respect. I am not sure if it was right for the railcard to be taken off them. Paying the difference in fare would have been the best on the spot solution.

'The Manual' indicates this is the ideal course of action:

Checking tickets held by the Family & Friends Railcard group
Check the tickets in the normal way: route, in date, valid on your train, etc.

When there is no child in the group but the customer shows their Railcard.
Excess the customers up to the undiscounted fares for the journey being made.

When members of the group become separated.
The group, whatever the size, must stay together throughout the journey.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

I am going to speak for the very little I believe I can make on here without getting into any trouble as I was the member of staff involved. I cannot and will not make any comment regarding this matter as the incident is being investigated. I will only say that there are two sides to every story and mine has not yet been heard by the newspaper keen to get credit for what I believe is a non-story. My report into the incident has been passed on to the relevant departments and official authorities for further consideration. It is now in the hands of Transpennine Express official channels to deal with this matter and resolve.


The only other comment I will add is the comments that have been posted on the website article show the severity of the incident.

 

[rs101]

She's posting a lot in the comments on the article. Claims the member of staff said his name was "Disco Dave"

 

[mallard]

When there is no child in the group but the customer shows their Railcard.
Excess the customers up to the undiscounted fares for the journey being made.

Miss Groody said: “I was told I would need to buy a new set of tickets or I’d be forced to leave the train at the next stop.

“I offered to pay the difference but the man wouldn’t accept it.

Pretty clear that the member of staff did not follow the guidance in the manual then... It's a shame that the fares manual, with all it's additional rules and guidance is one of the best kept secrets in the industry.

 

[najaB]

Pretty clear that the member of staff...

Seeing as 'the member of staff' is a forum member and has posted on this thread, I think it would be common courtesy to withhold that type of comment until the internal company review is complete.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Pretty clear that the member of staff did not follow the guidance in the manual then... It's a shame that the fares manual, with all it's additional rules and guidance is one of the best kept secrets in the industry.

and you were there were you? No. But I was! As has already been stated by myself there are two sides to this story and I am currently not in a position to comment. I suggest you read the news article along with the posts that have been made in the comments on that article. Then you might get a better understanding of the seriousness of this matter and what actually happened

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Seeing as 'the member of staff' is a forum member and has posted on this thread, I think it would be common courtesy to withhold that type of comment until the internal company review is complete.

"LIKE" button well and truly clicked. Thanks!

 

[jumble]

"LIKE" button well and truly clicked. Thanks!

I fully agree with NajaB
I for one firmly believe that anyone publishing the sort of details in the responses to the article is VERY unlikely to be the type who thinks that telling the truth is important.
I hope you have reported her to BTP for harasment
Good luck mate
You need it dealing with this sort of "Customer"
I worked in retail for 6 months only a few years ago and realised then how horrible and deceitful some of the general public can be.

Jumble

 

[Gareth Marston]

There’s obviously not enough verifiable information for any of us to make any sort of informed comment on this, beyond the fact that the customer didn’t have valid tickets.

Having had a trawl through the comments on the newspaper website couple of posters on their believe she was on AP's on the wrong train also.

 

[185143]

Hmm... something's not right here, there's definately more to this.

I personally think she was trying it on and got caught and is now kicking off with some story to try and is now trying to portray someone doing their job as 'the nasty ticket man'

If I were a parent, I wouldn't be leaving my ill child in Durham and travelling back to Greater Manchester-under any circumstances.

I noticed in the comments she claimed that she didn't run to the papers-she only made a public post on Facebook about the issue and a Journalist friend picked up on it. That's definately totally different.(!)

It's difficult to have much sympathy with her...

 

[Gareth Marston]

I fully agree with NajaB
I for one firmly believe that anyone publishing the sort of details in the responses to the article is VERY unlikely to be the type who thinks that telling the truth is important.
I hope you have reported her to BTP for harasment
Good luck mate
You need it dealing with this sort of "Customer"
I worked in retail for 6 months only a few years ago and realised then how horrible and deceitful some of the general public can be.

Jumble

I went from 10.5 years in the Civil Service to running a booking office i used to deal with European Funding Grants and visited businesses - whilst I had people moan and comment on all aspects of Government including a lot that was nothing to do with my job there was no abuse and little confrontation the railways and the general public are different. However this is not all the time or every day but given the volume of people you come across the law of averages says you'll get one at some point. A lot posters who don't work in customer facing roles make ill informed comments on this forum because they don't experience the reality of the day to day on the railway.

 

[mallard]

Hmm... something's not right here, there's definately more to this.

Ah yes, the old railway industry response of "it sounds like the customer was treated unfairly, clearly that can't be the case so there must be some information missing..."

I personally think she was trying it on and got caught and is now kicking off with some story to try and is now trying to portray someone doing their job as 'the nasty ticket man'

If I were a parent, I wouldn't be leaving my ill child in Durham and travelling back to Greater Manchester-under any circumstances.

Many people do not have understanding employers who will let them take extra days off in those circumstances. Other people are on contracts (such as the so-called "zero hours" contracts) that mean doing so results in significant financial impact. While I believe it's fundamentally wrong to make a mother choose between looking after their ill child and making a rent payment or being able to afford groceries, it's a fact of life for many people in modern Britain.

I noticed in the comments she claimed that she didn't run to the papers-she only made a public post on Facebook about the issue and a Journalist friend picked up on it. That's definately totally different.(!)

It's difficult to have much sympathy with her...

When I post updates on my life on Facebook, I certainly don't expect media coverage; I'm just letting my friends know what's going on. Happening to have an interested journalist (I assume your incorrect capitalisation has some sort of meaning...) on your friends list is totally different to deliberately "running to the papers".

The typical attitudes of the railway industry; bash the passenger as much as possible, it's always their fault... Of course, if I were to say anything remotely equivalent to the heaps of unjustified nonsense being posted about this passenger about any particular industry body/business/group, it'd get removed from this forum within seconds for being "libellous".

 

[Harlequin]

So, in short, customer may have a valid point, may not. Probably a bit hasty to go to the papers. Might be genuinely upset.

Staff member may have been right, may have been wrong, may have been forced to deal with a bit much and possibly make an uncharacteristic decision.

Most of us don't know what happened, we can only speculate, but one of the few people that actually does know exactly what's happened has already posted here to say that he can offer no comment until the investigation's completed, and I doubt the subject of the article will post here either. Don't think there will be any facts emerging for a while.

What I will say is that if (as is alleged in the comments on the original article) the staff member has received abuse as a consequence of him doing his job, I really do feel for him.

 

[bb21]

The typical attitudes of the railway industry; bash the passenger as much as possible, it's always their fault... Of course, if I were to say anything remotely equivalent to the heaps of unjustified nonsense being posted about this passenger about any particular industry body/business/group, it'd get removed from this forum within seconds for being "libellous".

Utter tripe.

 

[mallard]

Utter tripe.

In this thread we have people pretty much explicitly accusing a named individual of criminality ("trying it on" is "attempting to evade a fare" is it not?). Is that not libellous?

 

[najaB]

("trying it on" is "attempting to evade a fare" is it not?). Is that not libellous?

No. And no.

 

[Darandio]

clearly that can't be the case so there must be some information missing..."

I thought that much was clear, the person involved is posting in this thread. Unless you are purposely ignoring them?

 

[mallard]

I thought that much was clear, the person involved is posting in this thread. Unless you are purposely ignoring them?

They haven't posted anything to ignore (quite understandably). Tautologies like "there are two sides to every story" don't add anything to the account. As I said before, maybe the staff member did everything correctly and the passenger is lying. Maybe they aren't. Maybe the staff member was having a tough evening, came accross overly blunt and the passenger reacted in kind. Maybe there is more to it that hasn't been made public. I'm certainly not going to accuse anyone of criminal acts based on nothing more than speculation.

I get that forum members and railstaff feel a loyalty to each other and want to protect each other, but it's entirely possible to discuss the incident in a sane manner without throwing insults and accusations around.

Saying "wait for the internal investigation" (whose results certainly won't be made public) is basically just an excuse to shut down discussion.

 

[Darandio]

I get that forum members and railstaff feel a loyalty to each other and want to protect each other, but it's entirely possible to discuss the incident in a sane manner without throwing insults and accusations around.

From what I can see, many of the replies in this thread are not from staff.

I guess it is who do you believe, the person that has an article in the paper, peacocking in the comments section and adding new snippets every hour, or the guard who is posting in the thread. From past experience, I know where my money lies.

See, you mention that when a passenger claims to be treated unfairly people always claim it cannot be the case. In this particular piece, yet again the claim is that a member of staff has become abusive. Look at 90% of threads in the Disputes & Prosecutions section and the gazillion news stories around the t'interweb, with repeated claims about the nasty RPI or the abusive guard.

Which is more likely, the majority of staff are nasty abusive oiks or that the passenger realises they have done something wrong and then try anything to wriggle out of it to reduce liability? Again, I know where my money lies on this one too.

Or it is all just a massive coincidence and it is the same few nasty employees catching these people.