Not able to buy returns on trains, only singles?

[reb0118]

Interesting to see the different views regarding this, thanks. Clearly from the outside looking in, it appeared to be a very grey area. Is continuously boarding a train without a ticket fare evading?

Well re the above. I am NOT stating this as absolute fact but again in my early days as a TE we were told that there was an "offence" of travelling by chance ie when you travel ticket-less on short distance journeys where you knew it was difficult for the revenue staff to check all the tickets. The offence was complete when you had been reported THREE times. Details would then be passed to the Fiscal for appropriate action to be taken.

I'm sure somebody who knows the bye-laws and how they relate to Scots Law could comment further. Remember it is the passengers' duty to ensure that they have a valid ticket where facilities exist prior to boarding and if boarding at an unstaffed station again it is legally their duty to find ticket issuing staff not the other way round. That's the theory anyway.

 

[Greenback]

I'm not at all sure that it's a passengers legal duty to seek out staff, despite what some TOC's would like to think!

If anyone knows to the contrary, please could you post a link to the relevant legislation?

 

[CarterUSM]

Well re the above. I am NOT stating this as absolute fact but again in my early days as a TE we were told that there was an "offence" of travelling by chance ie when you travel ticket-less on short distance journeys where you knew it was difficult for the revenue staff to check all the tickets. The offence was complete when you had been reported THREE times. Details would then be passed to the Fiscal for appropriate action to be taken.

I'm sure somebody who knows the bye-laws and how they relate to Scots Law could comment further. Remember it is the passengers' duty to ensure that they have a valid ticket where facilities exist prior to boarding and if boarding at an unstaffed station again it is legally their duty to find ticket issuing staff not the other way round. That's the theory anyway.

Not quite, the three offences you refer to may be and sound like , failure to produce any travel documentation, failure to provide means of payment for travel and failure to provide name and address, only then it becomes fare evasion, in Scotland anyway. Failure to provide name and address is where you contact the BTP for advice, though this is at your discretion and whether you consider it worthwhile. I think if somebody becomes flagged up on a database of ticket irregularities a few times, (if the relevant form has been filled out before) then action may be taken, though i'm not completely sure of that. You certainly contravene the by-laws by not purchasing a ticket where one was availiable at boarding though TVM's do not count now unless at one of the main stations where they still take cash.

 

[Ferret]

I'm not at all sure that it's a passengers legal duty to seek out staff, despite what some TOC's would like to think!

If anyone knows to the contrary, please could you post a link to the relevant legislation?

I believe there's a byelaw that relates to this, although I'm posting this from a blackberry so don't want to go trawling through the byelaws on this! What I can say is that my employers have managed to successfully prosecute several fare evaders just by asking 'if we hadn't come through the train checking tickets, would you have purchased one?' An answer in the negative is enough to earn you a criminal record....

 

[Greenback]

I believe there's a byelaw that relates to this, although I'm posting this from a blackberry so don't want to go trawling through the byelaws on this! What I can say is that my employers have managed to successfully prosecute several fare evaders just by asking 'if we hadn't come through the train checking tickets, would you have purchased one?' An answer in the negative is enough to earn you a criminal record....

I'm glad to say i;ve just had a quick look at the byelaws and can find none which say that custmers need to seek out members of on train staff if they board without a ticket, whether in a compulsory ticket area or not. I think this is wishful thinking in TOC's who like to give this impression to their staff and customers.

This shows how much some TOC's want to inconvenience their customers! If they can't provide ticket buying facilities on stations (at least ones that work), they want customers to go looking for a member of staff if they also can't be btohered to go through the train?

It's obviously easier for the TOC if they expect customers to do their work for them! One of the basic rules of business is to make it easy for customers to spend their money! This doesn't always seem to apply on the railway, where many companies attitudes seems to be to make it difficult to get a ticket and then threaten customers with prosecution and a criminal record if they don;t immediately search high and low for a staff member who is able to issue one!

I really, really wish that rail firms would come down hard on those people that deliberately evade fares, whilst leaving other passengers who want to pay, but have no opportunity to do so, alone!

 

[CarterUSM]

I really, really wish that rail firms would come down hard on those people that deliberately evade fares, whilst leaving other passengers who want to pay, but have no opportunity to do so, alone!

That's a fair shout, and a bit of common sense goes along way, it's exceedingly unfair to tar all with the evasion brush, a calm measured approach to ticketless travel will more often than not result in a convivial outcome for all concerned.

 

[Greenback]

Yes, I'm pleased to say that is what happens in this part of the world! I don;t have a personal axe to grind, but I wouldn't want to be tarred with the fare evader brush when I am somewhere else in the country!

Actaully, this brings to mind a forthcoming visit to Par in Cornwall. Apparently this is a penalty fare zone (for FGW but not for XC!!!), the ticket office is closed Saturdays and SUndays, there is no ticiket machine and so we will be reliant on buying on board!

 

[Ferret]

Greenback, it's all about your legal obligation to pay for your journey. Again I'm sending this from a blackberry, but it's clear the law requires customers to purchase a ticket either before boarding, on the train or before leaving the destination station. If that means seeking out staff either on the train or at the destination then so be it!

 

[bnm]

Greenback, it's all about your legal obligation to pay for your journey. Again I'm sending this from a blackberry, but it's clear the law requires customers to purchase a ticket either before boarding, on the train or before leaving the destination station. If that means seeking out staff either on the train or at the destination then so be it!

There is nothing in the byelaws that compels a traveller to seek out staff if their start station has no ticket facilities.


18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas
(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.
(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.
(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:

(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, he began his journey; or
(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket.

The Regulation of Railways Act 1889 which can be used for prosecution for fare evasion also makes no mention of a compulsion to seek out staff:

5. Penalty for avoiding payment of fare.
(1) Every passenger by a railway shall, on request by an officer or servant of a railway company, either produce, and if so requested deliver up, a ticket showing that his fare is paid, or pay his fare from the place whence he started, or give the officer or servant his name and address; and in case of default shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale.
(2) If a passenger having failed either to produce, or if requested to deliver up, a ticket showing that his fare is paid, or to pay his fare, refuses [or fails] on request by an officer or servant of a railway company, to give his name and address, any officer of the company or may detain him until he can be conveniently brought before some justice or otherwise discharged by due course of law.
(3) If any person—
(a)Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or
(b)Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or
(c)Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,
he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 2 on the standard scale or, in the case of a second or subsequent offence, either to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale, or in the discretion of the court to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months.


As I said, no mention in either of those pieces of legislation, of an onus on the traveller to seek out staff at any point of the journey. If there is a legal obligation it's not spelled out in any legislation I can find.

 

[455driver]

So the TOCs will up the fares so every other passenger will just get charged more next year to make up the shortfall from the fare dodgers! Boy will they moan then! But hey its the railways fault for not having a guard/RPI in every coach of every train :roll:.
Why do people think it acceptable to travel for free on a train because the guard couldn't get through? Would you do the same in a shop, IE if there is a queue at the checkout would you just walk out with the goods in your hand?

 

[Ferret]

bnm, maybe you'd like to get in touch with the courts and tell them they've been wrongfully convicting people who have failed to pay for their journeys and attempted to leave the stations then? Come on guys, it's not bloody difficult - if you travel from A-B without buying a ticket and then leave railway premises, you have committed an offence. It's a breathtakingly simple concept to understand. Now, how would one avoid committing in offence if, for example, there was no ticket office open at A, the Guard did not come through or did not reach your carriage during the journey and you alight at B without having paid? Answer, you go to the ticket office at B, thus seeking out a member of staff and pay your fare.

 

[Greenback]

Greenback, it's all about your legal obligation to pay for your journey. Again I'm sending this from a blackberry, but it's clear the law requires customers to purchase a ticket either before boarding, on the train or before leaving the destination station. If that means seeking out staff either on the train or at the destination then so be it!

No, it's not about legal obligation. It's about customer service, and dealing properly with those that have no intention of paying their fare and are not deterred by facing a small 'fine' every now and again.

So the TOCs will up the fares so every other passenger will just get charged more next year to make up the shortfall from the fare dodgers! Boy will they moan then! But hey its the railways fault for not having a guard/RPI in every coach of every train :roll:.
Why do people think it acceptable to travel for free on a train because the guard couldn't get through? Would you do the same in a shop, IE if there is a queue at the checkout would you just walk out with the goods in your hand?

This argument keeps coming up iver and over again,. No one is arguing that people should not queue to buy a ticket if necessary. The question here is whther those travellers who are unable to buy a ticket before boarding a train, through no fault of their own, should then be compelled to seek out a member of staff at their own inconvenience. I am unsure how, in making a train trip inconvenient in this way, the railway seeks to ensure repeat business, particularly as there is nothing in the public domain that would lead the innocent traveller to believe that failure to do this will lead to them being deemed a fare dodger and criminal by TOC's and some of their more misguided staff. Not that I believe there are any more than a couple nationally who would expect passengers to behave in this way.

If trains call at unstaffed stations without ticket machines, and are so busy that a guard cannot get through, then the TOC should ensure that, given the popularity of these services, that ticket issuing facilities are available. Uf tucket facilities are available, then it would be easier to discover who has deliberately not made use of them.

 

[ainsworth74]

Now, how would one avoid committing in offence if, for example, there was no ticket office open at A, the Guard did not come through or did not reach your carriage during the journey and you alight at B without having paid? Answer, you go to the ticket office at B, thus seeking out a member of staff and pay your fare.

Perfectly reasonable, I've done that myself before now. However, what if there isn't a ticket office or ticket machine at B?

 

[Ferret]

Greenback, you're beginning to bore me. You're credibility just shot through the floor the moment you suggested a member of staff is misguided for suggesting that every passenger should pay for their journey *as the laws of the land demand*. Now strangely enough, machinery breaks down now and then, and it's always likely that a Guard may not get through an entire train on occasions for a number of reasons. This combination of factors does not absolve a passenger from his legal obligation to pay his fare whether it's inconvenient or not to have to pop to the booking office at his destination. Now, you can choose to ignore those harsh facts if you wish but the courts are not on your side on this one - I suggest you deal with it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Perfectly reasonable, I've done that myself before now. However, what if there isn't a ticket office or ticket machine at B?

Then the customer has done everything he possibly can to pay his fare, and would not be liable to prosecution in my opinion.

 

[mumrar]

(3) If any person —
(a)Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having
previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof;

Note it says travels, or attempts to travel. Whether a member of staff has come up to you or not, should you travel without paying you have committed a byelaw offence. If I went in to a shop to find their till had broken, could I just walk out with the goods and leave a forwarding address? I go to DFS for a fat sofa, their computers for a credit check aren't working, oh well - free sofa for me then!

 

[Lampshade]

So the TOCs will up the fares so every other passenger will just get charged more next year to make up the shortfall from the fare dodgers!

This goes up year on year anyway. There has been little to no research and as much evidence to suggest the babblings of ATOC when it comes to this and the fare paying passengers are very naive if they actually believe it. It's just what ATOC says to justify repeatedly raising the fares above the rate of inflation,

 

[Greenback]

Greenback, you're beginning to bore me. You're credibility just shot through the floor the moment you suggested a member of staff is misguided for suggesting that every passenger should pay for their journey *as the laws of the land demand*. Now strangely enough, machinery breaks down now and then, and it's always likely that a Guard may not get through an entire train on occasions for a number of reasons. This combination of factors does not absolve a passenger from his legal obligation to pay his fare whether it's inconvenient or not to have to pop to the booking office at his destination. Now, you can choose to ignore those harsh facts if you wish but the courts are not on your side on this one - I suggest you deal with it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Then the customer has done everything he possibly can to pay his fare, and would not be liable to prosecution in my opinion.

Sorry, popping to the booking office, assuming there's one there and still open, at the destination is fine if no one has come through the train. Or purchasing at the barrier if there is one.

What I don't agree with is any idea that the customer should walk through the train to seek out any member of staff. Once again, sorry if I didn't make that clear.

However, I don;t think there's any call to isnult me by saying that my contribution to a discussion is boring. Whilst you may disagree, if you don't want to listen to other people's vierws, then don't contribute. I am willing to be corrected on any point of fact, as you have been about the byelaws. I will not stoop to saying where that leaves your credibility, as I prefer to conduct a debate in a mature and civilised manner.

 

[Ferret]

Only I haven't been proved wrong about the byelaws have I? See Mumrar's post above.

The thing is, many people do walk through the train and look for the Guard in order to pay their fare. It's the actions of a reasonable person. The byelaw Mumrar mentions firmly places the onus on the customer to purchase a ticket. It is not unreasonable to ask that the customer makes every effort to pay his fare and that includes looking for the Guard whilst on board. I must agree that if the Guard hides and then there are no facilities at point B then there is little else the customer can reasonably be expected to do. That then becomes the TOC's problem....!

 

[455driver]

If it is unreasonable to expect somebody to go and find the guard, why should they have to find the ticket office or ticket machine? Surely the same rules will apply!

 

[222007]

The thing is, many people do walk through the train and look for the Guard in order to pay their fare. !

As an RPI i would disagree completely with that statement. In nearly 2 years i have had only 5 people approach myself (or my guards for that matter) asking to purchase a ticket, i remember the number because its such a rare occurence. 99.9% of people will sit (or stand) waiting for the guard to purchase there ticket

 

[Greenback]

Only I haven't been proved wrong about the byelaws have I? See Mumrar's post above.

The thing is, many people do walk through the train and look for the Guard in order to pay their fare. It's the actions of a reasonable person. The byelaw Mumrar mentions firmly places the onus on the customer to purchase a ticket. It is not unreasonable to ask that the customer makes every effort to pay his fare and that includes looking for the Guard whilst on board. I must agree that if the Guard hides and then there are no facilities at point B then there is little else the customer can reasonably be expected to do. That then becomes the TOC's problem....!

If it is unreasonable to expect somebody to go and find the guard, why should they have to find the ticket office or ticket machine? Surely the same rules will apply!

I think we may be talking at cross purposes here. I originally began by replying to reb118, who seemed to think that it was an offence to travel without a ticket unless a customer sought out the staff. I couldn't agree more that anyone who avoids their fare or whot ravels with the intention of not apying their fare is an offender, is guilty of breaking the byelaws and should be prosecuted.

What I am saying is that there are instances where the custome ris unable to buy a ticket, through no fault of their own, and I don't think it is incumbent on the passenger to have to go through the train looking for a member of staff. I don;lt hink it is reasonable for a customer to have to do that, nor do i think that there is any legal requirement to do so. I also think that if I was a passenger who was in this position, I would believe that any member of staff who told me I should have gone through the train, is misguided. The byelawsd specifically make exception for those who board where there are no ticket buying facilities available. If it was deemed necessary to seek out the member of on train staff to get a ticket, I would expect that to be there in that section of the byelaws.

As I said, I don't think there are many at all who would expect a customer to do this. There certainly aren't any in my area, thank goodness.

It's different where there are ticket offices/working TVM's and barriers. The fact that soemone has chosen not to buy a ticket before boarding the train might be indicative of an intent to avoid payment, but there are quite a few occasions where people do board without paying, for example companies who advertise that customers can buy on board. So it is not as cut and dried as we might like.

As to the arguments that are constantly put forward about Tesco et al, the main difference is that supermarklets would not withdraw all checkout staff to save money, or reduce the check out hours, install insufficient auto checkouts that constantly break down, and employ a roving check out person who the customer must seek out in order to leave the store without breaking the law. That, in effect is what we are talking about, and if any store did that they would soon go out of business as they would have no customers at all.

Oh, forgot a bit there. Just because some do walk through the train and find the guard does not mean that everyone should, or that it a legal requirement. My opinion is that TOC's are abdicating some of their responsibilities in making it easy to get a ticket and then expecting the customer to do their work for them

 

[Ferret]

As an RPI i would disagree completely with that statement. In nearly 2 years i have had only 5 people approach myself (or my guards for that matter) asking to purchase a ticket, i remember the number because its such a rare occurence. 99.9% of people will sit (or stand) waiting for the guard to purchase there ticket

I've got to say on my local line it's a regular occurence! I usually sit at the back of the train on my way home and there have been far more than 5 occasions this month that I've seen the guard's door being knocked! And whilst at work, I've been approached several times on the platform while waiting to dispatch by people wanting to buy tickets, and I too have had people come looking for me in the train offering to buy tickets. I guess it's a geographical thing!

Greenback, I think there are areas where you and I broadly agree! Not for a minute would I say that it's right for a TOC to remove TVMs and booking offices and then expect the customer to do their jobs for them. What I am saying is that the byelaws place every emphasis on the customer to do all that is reasonable to buy a ticket. And in the eyes of the law, that may include actively seeking a member of staff - so much of law comes down to what is reasonable... Is it unreasonable to look for the Guard? Probably not!

 

[Greenback]

There does seem to be a wide variance geographically, in the expectations of both passengers and staff. I;m sure we all agree that fare evaders should not be tolerated, and that a more robust method of dealing with them is needed in some areas. It's a bit sad that we are arguing over what amounts to small details!