Passenger Obligation To Buy A Ticket

[exile]

if im not mistaken clamping is soon to become illegal on private land.

If so, that's a shame. If someone parked on my drive and blocked me in I think clamping would be the least I'd like to do to their car. Logically, the same should apply to any private land, as long as you're given fair warning and it isn't a scam.

 

[Greenback]

Another key point is how you define adequate ticket buying facilities, I'm not sure the travel centre at Piccadilly is particularly sub-standard, although it can suffer from long queues at times (usually when the Advance sales point is not open).

If the only opportunity to buy a ticket is at your destination, that is IMO not good enough.

I agree. To my mind, it is not going to be economic to put ticket offices and TVM's at every station, and I have argued as much in another thread.

However, when you have areas where there are a lot of stations without any purchasing facilities at all, then surely this only serves to increase the pressure on the guard and the destination station. As an example, if there is a machine fault or the guard can't get through a west wales to Swansea train, there can be quite a long queue at the excess office before the barriers on arrival in Swansea, as passengers from Ferryside, Kidwelly, Burry Port and Gowerton will not have had any opportunity to purchase.

I think that there should be some sort of minimum level of ticketing facilities prescribed into franchises, but I'm not sure what would be appropriate. Indeed, it's probable that different areas would have different requirements.

Naturally, I am aware that the hardened fare dodgers would not use the facilities, but improving their provision would stop some of the opportunism that exists.

 

[TUC]

There have been several occeasions when the ticket office at the start of the journey was closed and no one attended on the train and so I have bought my ticket at my destination. However what I haven't done at the destination station is to look out for any excess fares points before leaving the ticketed area at my destination. I've usually just aimed for the main ticket office and bought it there. From some of the comments, especially related to Northern, I am concerned that some passengers like me who have a genuine intention to pay could find themselves in difficulties simply for not having noticed an excess fares window. Is that the case?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I think most posters are concerned that people will head straight for the exit and be caught travelling without a ticket (with intent) purely based on the fact that they may not realise they have to pay for the fare.

I would suggest that making an attempt to pay, even if not succeeding, would be better than just making for the exit thinking they have got away without paying.

 

[Greenback]

There have been several occeasions when the ticket office at the start of the journey was closed and no one attended on the train and so I have bought my ticket at my destination. However what I haven't done at the destination station is to look out for any excess fares points before leaving the ticketed area at my destination. I've usually just aimed for the main ticket office and bought it there. From some of the comments, especially related to Northern, I am concerned that some passengers like me who have a genuine intention to pay could find themselves in difficulties simply for not having noticed an excess fares window. Is that the case?

I think it is entirely possible that someone could inadvertently walk past a member of staff selling tickets. Similarly, it;s not beyond the realms of possibility thats omeone could fail to spot an excess window and walk out if there were no barriers.

In Swansea this doesn't arise as people get their tickets at the old announcers office at the platform side of the barriers. If the barriers are open then the ticket office is closed (except for Sundays) so I guess that most people would just walk out then!

 

[Old Timer]

There have been several occeasions when the ticket office at the start of the journey was closed and no one attended on the train and so I have bought my ticket at my destination. However what I haven't done at the destination station is to look out for any excess fares points before leaving the ticketed area at my destination. I've usually just aimed for the main ticket office and bought it there. From some of the comments, especially related to Northern, I am concerned that some passengers like me who have a genuine intention to pay could find themselves in difficulties simply for not having noticed an excess fares window. Is that the case?

The Law requires that "intent" is proven.

Intent, and indeed on the contrary no dishonest intent, can be proven on the basis of verbal comments made by the passenger. I imagine that the majority of RPIs would be able to recognise a case where someone could argue that they did not genuinely see the ticket office or ticket machine. At the end of the day the decision comes down to an individual inspector's judgement, and potentially the ability of the passenger to disprove intent in the Court.

That said the role of the RPI is as much deterrence as prosecution so many will caution and give the benefit of the doubt particularly where "intent" is debatable. I myself have had to live with debatable "intents" but you learn that ther eis always the enxt time, and following the issue of the letter, the next time the less the strength of the excuse, and the chance of going for multiple evasion.

 

[daikilo]

I have not been able to find a statement from Northern Rail that if you are not able to purchase a ticket at the departure station nor been given the opportunity to do so from the train crew then you should do so before leaving the arrival station (there being, I assume) no physical barrier or obvious sign to warn you that you would be committing an offence if you were to pass that point without being in possession of a ticket).

My copy of what I wrote suggested that (paraphrasing) you respond to the letter by saying that as you did not have the possibility beforehand, you are ready to pay the appropriate fare with a cheque if they send you a stamped addressed envelope. My logic is that paying the fare should not be onourous for you.

I am not an expert on law but, you probably left Northern property in Picaddilly when you descended from the train. There is no requirement I am aware of which says you should keep your proof of travel after you have left the TOC property, and even less to be required to show it to non-TOC security guards.

 

[Old Timer]

I am not an expert on law but, you probably left Northern property in Picaddilly when you descended from the train. There is no requirement I am aware of which says you should keep your proof of travel after you have left the TOC property, and even less to be required to show it to non-TOC security guards.

Refer NCoC Section 1 clause 1 and clause 22 respectively.

 

[daikilo]

I think most posters are concerned that people will head straight for the exit and be caught travelling without a ticket (with intent) purely based on the fact that they may not realise they have to pay for the fare.

I would suggest that making an attempt to pay, even if not succeeding, would be better than just making for the exit thinking they have got away without paying.

I don't care what most posters might think, UK law applies. Travellers cannot be caught travelling without a ticket if they are off the train and TOC property. They could be stopped on TOC property if they showed that they had deliberately not attempted to pay the fare when they could hav done (that said, I would actually question how a TOC could enforce this if they had not provided the opportunities and if it is not formally stated in the conditions of travel that payment at destination is obligatory.

 

[Old Timer]

I don't care what most posters might think, UK law applies. Travellers cannot be caught travelling without a ticket if they are off the train and TOC property. They could be stopped on TOC property if they showed that they had deliberately not attempted to pay the fare when they could hav done (that said, I would actually question how a TOC could enforce this if they had not provided the opportunities and if it is not formally stated in the conditions of travel that payment at destination is obligatory.

Tell you what, you come with me one day and let us prove you wrong, eh ?

 

[daikilo]

Refer NCoC Section 1 clause 1 and clause 22 respectively.

Wish I could check these clauses, but can't seem to. If not in line with my thinking, I would probably contest it in font of our Lords. What do these clauses say please and have they been contested?

 

[snail]

I am not an expert on law but, you probably left Northern property in Picaddilly when you descended from the train. There is no requirement I am aware of which says you should keep your proof of travel after you have left the TOC property, and even less to be required to show it to non-TOC security guards.

By that logic, you wouldn't have to show a ticket at a number of stations in the north of England. According to their website they call at over 500 stations and manage 462. Are you saying that if I got a Northern train to Preston I don't need to show my ticket to the Northern RPIs standing on the overbridge from Platform 1, because it's a Virgin West Coast station?

 

[daikilo]

Tell you what, you come with me one day and let us prove you wrong, eh ?

How will you prove me wrong? Law is words on paper. Interpretation of law is jurisprudence, which then becomes case reference law. Guidance please.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I am not an expert on law but, you probably left Northern property in Picaddilly when you descended from the train. There is no requirement I am aware of which says you should keep your proof of travel after you have left the TOC property, and even less to be required to show it to non-TOC security guards.

I wonder if you might, inadvertently perhaps, have missed the point of the regulations that do exist? I struggle to find the motivation for any Company to bid for a frachise to operate Railway services unless they had robust grounds to support their business model which show a return on investment. That's quite a straighforward commercial risk-assessment I think.
The crucial element in that risk assessment will be to ensure that there is a statutory and commercial framework in place which will protect or, at the worst, add support to, the revenue element of that business plan. In the case of Northern Rail or any other TOC, that protection is provided by Law (albeit the rather ancient RRA (1889)).
No, that Law does not require a passenger to "keep your proof of travel after you have left the TOC property" but it does require the passenger to have a valid ticket available for inspection. Its not terribly difficult to make a distinction between :
a person who has committed an Offence (not having a valid ticket for thier journey);
a person who has not and takes an opportunity not to pay (who would not attempt to buy one until challenged);
a person who would have been pleased to pay but has been frustrated at every apparent opportunity.

We've been discussing the very challenging environment which Northern Rail faces with its almost 500 stations which it directly manages and perhaps almost as many again which it serves but managed by other Companies.
There is no simple solution to the challenge they face and it must be no surprise that there are many who will seek to exploit any (apparent) weakness in their Revenue plans, their skill has to be judged only on how well they deploy their limited resources to maximise revenue due. After a few hundred posts on the subject (many well informed), all I have been able to add is the suggestion that a few posters at unstaffed stations ppointing out the opportunity to pay for travel at the destination might help.
Its not much of a suggestion.

 

[daikilo]

By that logic, you wouldn't have to show a ticket at a number of stations in the north of England. According to their website they call at over 500 stations and manage 462. Are you saying that if I got a Northern train to Preston I don't need to show my ticket to the Northern RPIs standing on the overbridge from Platform 1, because it's a Virgin West Coast station?

Probably, yes.

 

[Old Timer]

Wish I could check these clauses, but can't seem to. If not in line with my thinking, I would probably contest it in font of our Lords. What do these clauses say please and have they been contested?

Oh Please !!!! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

You know its posts like this that really do spoil the forum.

You are obviously conencted up to the internet and you obviously have the ability to google "National Conditions of Carriage".

Right now you are on the brink of making yourself look very silly. Your past and no doubt next few comments about legal rights responsibilities, duties, etc, will have been debunked many times over on here already.

Your previous post is just so inaccurate as to not be worthy of response. I would suggest you go and read previous threads on this topic.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Interpretation of law is jurisprudence, which then becomes case reference law. Guidance please.

Corbyn vs Saunders on Appeal to Lord Widgery 1977

 

[snail]

Wish I could check these clauses, but can't seem to.

Clue: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/system/galleries/download/misc/NRCOC.pdf

 

[daikilo]

I wonder if you might, inadvertently perhaps, have missed the point of the regulations that do exist? I struggle to find the motivation for any Company to bid for a frachise to operate Railway services unless they had robust grounds to support their business model which show a return on investment. That's quite a straighforward commercial risk-assessment I think.
The crucial element in that risk assessment will be to ensure that there is a statutory and commercial framework in place which will protect or, at the worst, add support to, the revenue element of that business plan. In the case of Northern Rail or any other TOC, that protection is provided by Law (albeit the rather ancient RRA (1889)).
No, that Law does not require a passenger to "keep your proof of travel after you have left the TOC property" but it does require the passenger to have a valid ticket available for inspection. Its not terribly difficult to make a distinction between :
a person who has committed an Offence (not having a valid ticket for thier journey);
a person who has not and takes an opportunity not to pay (who would not attempt to buy one until challenged);
a person who would have been pleased to pay but has been frustrated at every apparent opportunity.

We've been discussing the very challenging environment which Northern Rail faces with its almost 500 stations which it directly manages and perhaps almost as many again which it serves but managed by other Companies.
There is no simple solution to the challenge they face and it must be no surprise that there are many who will seek to exploit any (apparent) weakness in their Revenue plans, their skill has to be judged only on how well they deploy their limited resources to maximise revenue due. After a few hundred posts on the subject (many well informed), all I have been able to add is the suggestion that a few posters at unstaffed stations ppointing out the opportunity to pay for travel at the destination might help.
Its not much of a suggestion.

I actually don't care about challenging environments, without travellers the rest would be dead. I have been discussing UK Law and what is allowable or not for Lily.

 

[bnm]

Curve ball time....

If, after boarding at a station with no facilities and arriving at your destination station without an opportunity to buy on board, would a call and purchase from a TOCs Telesales before walking out of that destination station be sufficient to avoid a potential s5 RRA prosecution?

Could be a handy alternative if the ticket office is very busy.

 

[RJ]

To then sit outside the railway station AFTER they have have passed the ticket office waiting to pounce on them is close to entrapment.

At the end of the day, in what should be all cases where people are reprimanded, they had a previous opportunity to do the right thing. Catching people who think they have gotten away with it is not entrapment.

 

[nedchester]

Oh Please !!!! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

You know its posts like this that really do spoil the forum.

You are obviously conencted up to the internet and you obviously have the ability to google "National Conditions of Carriage".

Right now you are on the brink of making yourself look very silly. Your past and no doubt next few comments about legal rights responsibilities, duties, etc, will have been debunked many times over on here already.

Your previous post is just so inaccurate as to not be worthy of response. I would suggest you go and read previous threads on this topic.

Agree! If you are on railway property (TOC doesn't matter) you can get asked to present your ticket. However, I suspect once off the property (and by this I mean the street) then RPIs have no jurisdiction.

I remember a few passengers telling an TTI where to get off when he tried to grip me (and others) outside a chip shop in Caersws many years ago!!! When the same TTI asked me 10 minutes later on the platform I was more than happy to present him my valid ticket!

 

[Old Timer]

Curve ball time....

If, after boarding at a station with no facilities and arriving at your destination station without an opportunity to buy on board, would a call and purchase from a TOCs Telesales before walking out of that destination station be sufficient to avoid a potential s5 RRA prosecution?

Could be a handy alternative if the ticket office is very busy.

AS always the test is "intent" to avoid payment.

I could forsee an argument that a ticket bought via telesales could be used later on.

Intent has always been based upon a passenger leaving the station despite there being an availability to pay. The Court will not take into consideration any waiting time. This is irrelevant in the fact that by walking out the passenger was leaving the station withouit having paid the fare. Historically this is an open and shut S5.

Whilst it may not be what people want to hear, the simplest solution is to simply queue. Booking offices, even at Manchester Piccadilly, cannot be THAT busy that one is standing there for hours !

By the amount of publicity given even I now know to make sure I get a ticket before arriving there !

 

[daikilo]

I wish you were correct! It seems to make common sense, doesn't it?

Sadly, that's not the view of Railway Operators. In particular, Northern Rail rely very heavily on human checks at Manchester looking for passengers who've travelled in from smaller stations (staffed or unstaffed). They take the view "5. 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;" applies to all their passengers who don't buy at the origin, who don't buy on-board and who walk past the ticket window at the destination without buying. In those cases that reach the Magistrates Courts, then the Magistrates don't have much choice in prosecuting the passenger as this precise situation is captured in Case Law.

Posters and publicity (or the lack of it) just doesn't come into it.
Personally, I think northern could and should do more to make passengers aware of their obligations, though frankly they are riddled with so many fare dodgers and persistent evaders who wouldn't pay a bit of attention to any official notice that they put all of their resources into trying to trap as many of those people as possible - and that's perhaps how the OP got caught up in all this.

I trust you understand the difference between don't and can't (or are not given the opportunity to). I remain convinced my logic is true.

Our Lords are attentive to distinguish betwen those who cannot and those who deliberately avoid.

 

[Old Timer]

Agree! If you are on railway property (TOC doesn't matter) you can get asked to present your ticket. However, I suspect once off the property (and by this I mean the street) then RPIs have no jurisdiction.

I remember telling an TTI where to get off when he tried to grip me (and others) outside a chip shop in Caersws a few years ago!!! When the same TTI asked me 10 minutes later on the platform I was more than happy to present him my valid ticket!

Fare evasion is a criminal offence and as such there is NO requirement for the person to be stopped on Railway property. There never has been.

I know this for a fact having successfully Prosecuted fare evasion at one point in my life where passengers were detained off Railway property.

Technically the Statute of Limitations applies and you could be charged with a S5 months after the actual instance. Again there is long case history of this when we have prosecuted serial evaders, and gone back months to demonstrate the level of dishonesty. Never lost one of those either.

 

[nedchester]

At the end of the day, in what should be all cases where people are reprimanded, they had a previous opportunity to do the right thing. Catching people who think they have gotten away with it is not entrapment.

You have to ask WHY they can't grip people before they pass the ticket office. I would imagine you'd have the same number of RPIs to catch people as they come out of the station as they would inside the station as they come off the platform.

 

[Old Timer]

You have to ask WHY they can't grip people before they pass the ticket office. I would imagine you'd have the same number of RPIs to catch people as they come out of the station as they would inside the station as they come off the platform.

Simply because they are there to detect evasion. You can only prove this by giving the person an opportunity to pay !

If you attempted to S5 them before they had passed the barrier line or ticket office then they would be able to successfully appeal and win, and you would accuse the RPIs of entrapment.

In stopping people after they have passed beyond the ticket barrier/office, they have prima facie evidence of intent - otherwise why had the passenger not paid at the barrier/office.

 

[nedchester]

Fare evasion is a criminal offence and as such there is NO requirement for the person to be stopped on Railway property. There never has been.

I know this for a fact having successfully Prosecuted fare evasion at one point in my life where passengers were detained off Railway property.

Technically the Statute of Limitations applies and you could be charged with a S5 months after the actual instance. Again there is long case history of this when we have prosecuted serial evaders, and gone back months to demonstrate the level of dishonesty. Never lost one of those either.

The instance I describe was when the TTI used to check enthusiasts every week coming off one of the platforms at Caersws when they were hauled by class 37s. This week the train stopped short and the TTI could get off in time. About 25 enthusiasts got off. Some of the passengers could have potentially thrown their tickets in a bin so how would the TTI PROVE they didn't have a ticket anyhow.

Are you saying that a TTI can ask to see my ticket outside my house (some one mile from the station?) As I pointed out once I was back on railway property I was more than happy to show him my ticket.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Simply because they are there to detect evasion. You can only prove this by giving the person an opportunity to pay !

Well give them the opportunity to pay as they leave the platform by asking them for their ticket and then charging them the fare. Simples!!

 

[daikilo]

I've created this thread for a discussion that threatened to engulf an advice thread.

Essentially, this thread is to discuss whether it is fair and equitable to MG11 a passenger (report for prosecution) for failing to buy a ticket for their journey. The situation is a passenger boarding at an unstaffed station, travelling without seeing the guard, alighting at a staffed station and walking past an open booking office.

In this case I believe it is just about fair that prosecution might be a consequence. I do not want to enter a legal discussion (for IANAL) about torts, intent, and so forth. However, this type of fare evasion, while not as serious as forged tickets, is still fare evasion. It is the same as theft by finding, or making off without payment (in a moral sense, not a legal sense).

I just don't see why it doesn't occur to people to pay the fare. If I eat a meal at a restaurant, order the bill and it never arrives, I don't just walk out!

Is paying the fare required by law really that hard?

Not paying because you have tried but are not given the opportunity and then the obligation to pay is not evasion.

 

[Old Timer]

The instance I describe was when the TTI used to check enthusiasts every week coming off one of the platforms at Caersws when they were hauled by class 37s. This week the train stopped short and the TTI could get off in time. About 25 enthusiasts got off. Some of the passengers could have potentially thrown their tickets in a bin so how would the TTI PROVE they didn't have a ticket anyhow.

Are you saying that a TTI can ask to see my ticket outside my house (some one mile from the station?) As I pointed out once I was back on railway property I was more than happy to show him my ticket.

THere is no easment to only require you to produce the ticket on Railway property. Many station entrances open onto the publich highway or into shopping malls.

The Legislation requires you to demonstrate that you have a valid ticket. The ticket remains the property of the Railway, and therefore throwing it away or destroying it actaully technically constitutes theft.

A common "defence" is for a fare evader to claim that they have left the ticket or lost it. In Law the requirement is to produce when so requested. It is for the passenger to prove they have paid for the journey NOT for the Railway to do so. A failure to produce has for many, many years been taken as initial "intent" to support a S5 and many successful Prosecutions have proceeded on that basis.

The passenger agrees when using the Railway to the requirement to produce a railway ticket when so asked.

In answer to your question about being asked subsequently, there is a history of people making claims a for injury after train accidents having been prosecuted for fraud after they have been challenged to produce a ticket subsequently and having been unable to do so.

You and I have debated this very subject some months back and yet again you still fail to accept what the Law allows for. You can retain that belief if you wish but it is not the case in reality.

As we have debated before there is the common sense approach that a ticket would be asked for in close vicinity to the station not a long way down the street. Technically though an Inspector could form the view that you had potentially evaded and required you to prove you had a ticket because fare evasion is a criminal offence not a civil offence, therefore it is only subject to the Statute of Limitations in terms of time not in space or distance. Was that to be the case then no arrests could ever take place following robberies, etc.

You should also consider the situation of shop theft, where a person could be apprehended some way from the shop or indeed well away from the shop. Again the offence is criminal and is not constrained by virtue of distance.

That said it is unusual for logistical reasons for a person to be asked for a ticket once they have gone some way away from the Railway property.

Well give them the opportunity to pay as they leave the platform by asking them for their ticket and then charging them the fare. Simples!!

That does not allow the identification of fare evaders. The passenger can go to the booking office and pay !

I trust you understand the difference between don't and can't (or are not given the opportunity to). I remain convinced my logic is true.

Our Lords are attentive to distinguish betwen those who cannot and those who deliberately avoid.

Fare evasion is dealt with at the Magistrates Court except in exceptional circumstances.

"Our Lords" only deal with Appeals on matters of technicality. There is no Appeal to be made against a penalty handed out at the Magistrates Court because the Law is quite simple and straightforward, and any such technicalities have already been Appealed many years before you were born.

Not paying because you have tried but are not given the opportunity and then the obligation to pay is not evasion.

A section 5 will ONLY arise when an opportunity to pay has been made available. Thus the booking ofice will be open and/or there will be staff at the barrier / line. Without this a Section 5 cannot be proven and it is necessary for all the bases to be covered before it goes to Court.