Open period tickets and lack of trust

[RJ]

This isn't something I'm going to lodge a complaint about or make a big thing of, but just wanted to see what others think about the situation. If any ticket inspectors could advise what they would have done in the situation and any passengers could advise what they would have done in my shoes, that would be great.

For the record, at that gateline there was no dispute over the routing or anything like that.

So, I held the return portion of an Off Peak Return which is valid for a Cross London transfer. The outward was valid from late January. I had used the ticket to travel towards London some time last week, so the ticket had been marked once, with a pen. I had crossed London was now resuming the journey and travelling on the final leg from the appropriate London Terminal.

The ticket was in my bag for the last few days so whilst it looks a little bit worn, it wasn't damaged or faded or anything. I presented the ticket to the gateline ticket inspector and she instantly said "you've already used this ticket." I explained quite politely that I had used it on the first leg of the journey towards London and I was now using it to complete the journey. However, she was quite adamant I had already used it to complete the journey as it was suspect that I was only just trying to complete a journey when the start date of the ticket was 3 weeks ago.

I assured her that I had not yet used it on this leg of the journey and asked how I could prove this. She said that she knew a used ticket when she saw one and that she had the right to refuse to let me travel if she held that suspicion. Her colleague stepped in and backed her up, stating that I can't possibly be using the ticket for the first time after 3 weeks. I asked them what proof they had that I had already used it to the destination and offered it to them to swipe, as they both had Avantix Mobile machines. The instant retort was that I might not have put it through any barriers and they refused to check on the basis that the appearance of the ticket alone was enough evidence that it had already been used.

One of them took the ticket and endorsed it "Not accepted. RPO at [station name removed] believe this ticket has been used." The train left without me on it and they told me I needed go to the ticket office to buy a new ticket.

My personal opinion is that if a ticket is in date, clearly requires the use of multiple trains and has only been marked once with a pen, that ticket inspectors in the middle section of the journey should give the benefit of the doubt if there is no evidence to suggest it had already been used to complete the journey. However, this was considered as unreasonable to them and might be to others, which is why I'm asking for other's opinions on the matter.

I'm aware that the ticket is the property of the railways and its staff have the power to do what they like with a ticket held by a passenger, but I feel a little put out that a perfectly legitimate ticket was rejected for the final leg of the journey solely on the basis of the start date (not the expiry date!) and that it had been marked with one cross in biro already.

 

[johnb]

It's a very good example of why all grippers should be issued with proper stamps that mark the date and an identifiable code, rather than just being issued with biros (not the grippers' fault, but it's completely unacceptable on management's side).

 

[swj99]

One of them took the ticket and endorsed it "Not accepted. RPO at [station name removed] believe this ticket has been used." The train left without me on it and they told me I needed go to the ticket office to buy a new ticket.

My personal opinion is that if a ticket is in date, clearly requires the use of multiple trains and has only been marked once with a pen, that ticket inspectors in the middle section of the journey should give the benefit of the doubt if there is no evidence to suggest it had already been used to complete the journey.

As you have said, the ticket was valid for the journey, and despite your offering an inspector the opportunity to check the validity of it, she declined this offer. The NRCOC says you are entitled to travel if you have a valid ticket, which you did. Unless there was evidence that you had already used the ticket, I'd argue that it's valid and you are therefore entitled to travel ....

NRCOC PART I
2. Requirement to hold a ticket.
Before you travel you must have a ticket or other authority to travel which is valid for the train(s) you intend to use and for the journey you intend to make,....

It sounds to me like you just got unlucky with inspectors who mistook their own opinion for fact. On the basis that the ticket was valid, then clearly they, or the TOC would be able to offer no evidence that it was not, so for the inspectors to refuse to accept it strikes me as just being awkward.
In the circumstances you've described, I think I'd pay a single fare to the destination, then apply for a refund for the costs of so doing, and commence proceedings in the county court if necessary if the refund was refused. After all, if a TOC was owed money, they'd pursue it through a court, so they can hardly complain if a passenger does the same thing.

 

[sarahj]

Its a sad fact that many people using open returns do abuse them*, in fact some try and show them while in a wallet and become quite miffed when you mark it. If asked, i will mark it that it was checked between so and so.
The other day I came across one that was worn, had only a few days to go, oh and had been clipped. The pass said this had been done at Waterloo. Since i was unable to confirm I allowed the pass travel, but marked down the date on the ticket. (there was also a slodge on the ticket where it looked like something had been rubbed off)
As for 'grippers, I have asked, but these are very expensive, and in fact might not be used much on commuter style trains where time to get through and check is of the essence.


* abuse seems not to be cross london but eg BTN-London.

 

[bb21]

I think this matter does warrant a complaint, as the member of staff had no right to refuse travel without evidence. Unfortunately if she had no evidence to suggest otherwise, she had to allow the passenger access to their intended service.

It is unacceptable for members of staff to make up rules as they please. Her managers need to be aware of such behaviour.

 

[jb]

My personal opinion is that if a ticket is in date, clearly requires the use of multiple trains and has only been marked once with a pen, that ticket inspectors in the middle section of the journey should give the benefit of the doubt if there is no evidence to suggest it had already been used to complete the journey.

Irrefutable.

 

[D841 Roebuck]

It's a very good example of why all grippers should be issued with proper stamps that mark the date and an identifiable code, rather than just being issued with biros (not the grippers' fault, but it's completely unacceptable on management's side).

Nail:Head.

 

[barrykas]

It's a very good example of why all grippers should be issued with proper stamps that mark the date and an identifiable code, rather than just being issued with biros (not the grippers' fault, but it's completely unacceptable on management's side).

Sadly I can't see that happening, as biros are an order of magnitude cheaper than proper stampers (allegedly around £800 for the chunky blue Dormy ones, against less than a tenner for a box of 50 Bic biros).

 

[maniacmartin]

Interestingly enough, the franchise agreements for FCC and FGW state:

6.4 The Franchisee shall carry out the following revenue protection measures:
(a) the introduction of Zifa ticket checking stampers for all ticket checking staff within eight months of the Start Date;

I wonder if the other franchises have such an obligation, and if not, whether the DfT will write this into new franchise agreements.

 

[IanXC]

CrossCountry (or it could be Grand Central I'm not 100%) have recently started using zifa-style stampers, however they leave a slightly different stamp. I can't confirm, but its been suggested to me by a good source that these have been sourced at a lower cost from Deutsch Bahn's domestic operation.

 

[Chapeltom]

I'm slightly worried about the fact I'm going to use an Anytime Return in a few weeks time. I use them on my day to day commute anyway, but I'm using a Chinley to Southport return, breaking journey on 1st day of validity to then get a train to the Airport then on the 5th day resuming my journey at Manchester to continue towards my destination.

I know how much people abuse them, my case will probably helped by the fact I'll have a suitcase and the 5th day a single from Manchester Airport to Manchester Stns.

I think the ticket inspectors have to just give benefit of the doubt unless evidence suggests the ticket has been used before.

 

[RPI]

One thing that really p*sses me off is guards/Inspectors who mark with a PEN Arrrrgghhhhh!!!!! a pen mark means nothing so i would complain personally, the TOC i work for has issued Ziffa stamps to all staff involved in on train ticket checking and yet half of them don't use them, a ziffa stamp would have saved all of this hassle for you!

 

[island]

And only a small step ahead is those who never change the headcode on their stamper from 1Z00 or 1Z99.

 

[tony6499]

Would have to give you the benefit of the doubt, unless there is 100% proof that the ticket has been used then the customer should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Would there have been a case of the RPI at the gate knowing you or knowing of you so trying to get one over on you ?

 

[6Gman]

That's a shocker, and if it happened to me I'd be kicking up a hell of a fuss!

You held a valid ticket which they took from you!

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[jopsuk]

I've heard friends, colleagues and strangers discussing wiping biro marks off open returns to get more use out of them. It is widespread, and you did by the sounds of it present something that looked like a ticket that was likely to be being abused.

I'm not sure that properly indelible date stamping would even help- if anything, with a five day break of journey, it would make it seem even more suspicious.

Loopholes exist. You've every right to exploit them, and you are perhaps the most creative exploiter of them- I'm slightly in awe of this.

Revenue staff are under immense pressure to protect revenue. You must appreciate that regardless of how right you are, presenting a ticket in the state you describe and with the story you give would come across as highly supcious. I'm not entirely sure that "innocent unless proven guilty" has full force here- I am not a lawyer. I can understand why they did what they did, even if it wasn't right.

 

[crispy1978]

I'd kick up a stink as well. To have a valid ticket made invalid is grossly unfair - but as with most things, their suspicion has been aroused by the minority who would try it on.

I wonder if they would have said the same if it had been neatly stowed in your wallet with the same pen mark still on it?

My wife is going on an open return ticket in May for the birth of her first great-nephew, and will be utilising the full month of travel - I'll have to ask her to frame the ticket so it can't possibly get a mark on it in that case!!

 

[Ferret]

RJ - did you get the ticket back, or was it withdrawn.

As for biro scrawling on a ticket - I get hacked off with people who do that. What use is it to me? Similarly, what use is a hole in the ticket?! I need something with the headcode if it's all the same...then I may stand half a chance of being able to tell if it's been used to the end of its validity or not. Otherwise, I have to agree that I must give the passenger the benefit of the doubt. If I can't prove any wrongdoing then taking it to the ultimate level, I can't stand up in Court and not look like a prat!

 

[RJ]

They didn't withdraw it - one took it, wrote on it then gave it back.

Would have to give you the benefit of the doubt, unless there is 100% proof that the ticket has been used then the customer should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Would there have been a case of the RPI at the gate knowing you or knowing of you so trying to get one over on you ?

I'd be inclined to say no to the latter. Many staff at the station know me personally as I worked alongside them for the best part of two years and most of the rest probably know my face. These two were new faces I didn't recognise.

 

[sheff1]

That's a shocker, and if it happened to me I'd be kicking up a hell of a fuss!

Me too. If the station is a London Terminal I would expect there to be police (presumably BTP) around. I would have spoken to one of them and requested they accompany me back to the barrier.

If the officer agreed to accompany me, I would ask the barrier people to repeat the allegations in their presence so that their statement could be recorded by an unimpeachable witness.

If the officer declined to accompany me I would ask for their advice on what I should do next.

 

[Ferret]

I suppose one thing an honest person such as RJ could do is to ask the ticket examiner to mark the ticket (for example) 'used PLY-BRI' as I often do on the back of the ticket for those who are breaking a journey and are worried about having a similar experience. Of course, there's no obligation on the passenger to do this, but it's a simple thing that can be done.

Edit - to expand on my initial question then - it's my opinion that an RPO should if he suspects fraud, withdraw the ticket, take details and submit a TIR. I don't think the course of action taken here is correct!

 

[radamfi]

Of course, there's no reason why we have to have one month returns, and, as usual, the UK is unusual in this regard compared to the rest of Europe. Some places have singles valid on date of travel only, or open dated tickets which are validated on the platform. Single tickets in France or Italy are valid for two months, but need to be stamped before travel and after stamping can only be used for a certain amount of time.

I have to admit, I've been using Off Peak Returns/Savers for at least 20 years, often breaking journey throughout the month and never had a problem with guards.

 

[BigVince76]

Perhaps you should have offered them a postal order!

 

[transportphoto]

As we're talking about the uselessness of a Biro mark, I believe Abellio Greater Anglia issue single hole punchers for their revenue staff, what use are they?

TP

 

[lemonic]

As we're talking about the uselessness of a Biro mark, I believe Abellio Greater Anglia issue single hole punchers for their revenue staff, what use are they?

TP

To put a smile on passengers faces when they get an unusual hole stamped in their ticket e.g. an apple or a Christmas tree?

Seriously, they are better than nothing as I think it acts as a mental deterrent to some passengers not to reuse their tickets and of course if the ticket was to be checked manually at their starting station after it had already been hole punched (or on the train immediately after the first station) then it wouldn't look good for the passenger.

 

[michael769]

It seems odd that stampers should be too expensive.

You can get perfectly good date stampers from office supply companies for less than £5 and custom ones for about £25. This is less that the cost of many tickets so each stamper only needs to deter abuse of a single ticket to cover its costs.

If "proper" railway stampers are a lot more expensive the ToCs should really be looking more closely at the costs in their supply chain!

 

[34D]

I once had hassle at an intermediate gateline, where I was told "this ticket has already been used" and called a liar. The TOC sent me some vouchers.

 

[sarahj]

TBH, some stampers are not that good, i had two passengers on my train on tuesday who had come from EMT land and their ticket had been stamped, and it was a dull blue splodge with nothing readable.

 

[island]

That's the ink more so than the stamper. Most ink will be crap on thermal ticket stock.

 

[09065]

Don't the magnetic swipes on the Avantix machines no longer work then?
If you have used the ticket in a barrier then a ticket swipe would reveal all, surely?