Penalty fare increase to £100

[ComUtoR]

The penalty fare is due to increase to £100 on the 23rd Jan 2023. Do you think that this is will decrease fare evasion ?

 

[jon0844]

The penalty fare is due to increase to £100 on the 23rd Jan 2023. Do you think that this is will decrease fare evasion ?

No, but it will increase the server load on this forum!

 

[Benjwri]

I absolutely think it will decrease fare evasion. It's a concerningly common view of students at the university I go to that the chances of getting your ticket checked if you travel at the right time is less than 50%, and so they travel ticketless and firm it if they get caught, as the net cost is less than if they bought tickets (None seem to be aware of the potential for prosecution). Most of these tickets are in the £20 range, so a minimum of £100 significantly increase the risk of the fare, and therefore makes this no longer financially justifiable.

 

[AlterEgo]

I absolutely think it will decrease fare evasion. It's a concerningly common view of students at the university I go to that the chances of getting your ticket checked if you travel at the right time is less than 50%, and so they travel ticketless and firm it if they get caught, as the net cost is less than if they bought tickets (None seem to be aware of the potential for prosecution). Most of these tickets are in the £20 range, so a minimum of £100 significantly increase the risk of the fare, and therefore makes this no longer financially justifiable.

A disproportionately large number of people who come to this forum are either overseas people on visas or are students (nearly all medical ones - draw your own conclusions!). I’m sure there are a few Facebook groups or forums which encourage fare evasion the TOCs should invest some time in researching!

 

[Benjwri]

A disproportionately large number of people who come to this forum are either overseas people on visas or are students (nearly all medical ones - draw your own conclusions!). I’m sure there are a few Facebook groups or forums which encourage fare evasion the TOCs should invest some time in researching!

And many more don't. The most common advice I've heard is if you see an inspector cooperate and pretend you can't find your ticket, presumably to try and pass the attitude test, and get the penalty fare. I doubt these people would even consider the forums.

I've never even considered fare evasion, but over the last few years I've heard of tens of ways to evade fares on both buses and trains, some of which are entirely unenforceable. The TOCs really invest some time in trying to find them out because with how often I hear and see them they must be losing a significant amount of money.

 

[jon0844]

I absolutely think it will decrease fare evasion. It's a concerningly common view of students at the university I go to that the chances of getting your ticket checked if you travel at the right time is less than 50%, and so they travel ticketless and firm it if they get caught, as the net cost is less than if they bought tickets (None seem to be aware of the potential for prosecution). Most of these tickets are in the £20 range, so a minimum of £100 significantly increase the risk of the fare, and therefore makes this no longer financially justifiable.

A lot of students, even wearing their college lanyards, willingly push through gates so I am not sure any are going to worry about the higher PF any more than being MGd.

I don't recall seeing it as blatant in years gone by so I expect various student forums, TikTok and Facebook are 'educating' youngsters in how to avoid paying, and more importantly telling them what revenue staff can and can't actually do.

 

[Benjwri]

A lot of students, even wearing their college lanyards, willingly push through gates so I am not sure any are going to worry about the higher PF any more than being MGd.

Might just be the area and uni but I've never seen anyone force the barriers or even suggest it, instead the times which they are manned are well known and anyone I know that fare evades just goes when they are left open. I certainly do not know anyone that would even want to risk prosecution, something that will stay with you for life. I think that the idea that all students will just push their way through barriers, run away from enforcement staff etc is untrue, although perhaps shows the extent that fare evading goes on un noticed.

 

[jon0844]

Of course they don't all do it! The majority will pay just as anyone else.

It's just that there now seem to be loads of places telling people how to avoid paying and just push through because you won't (normally) get stopped. And these people won't be put off by any level of penalty fare.

Clearly such people should be MGd anyway.

 

[Benjwri]

It's just that there now seem to be loads of places telling people how to avoid paying and just push through because you won't (normally) get stopped. And these people won't be put off by any level of penalty fare.

Think this is more of a TfL thing though, I’ve only ever seen it happen once, and unfortunately it seemed no one ever told them it wasn’t such a good idea infront of the BTP, who at Reading really do seem to enjoy a good chase.

 

[spag23]

As a mere passenger I find the evaders so easy to spot. Approaching the Kings Cross gateline from the Met Line last month, I just knew from the hood and the swagger that the guy ahead of me was going to tailgate the person in front. As a cover he even pressed something against the reader, but his ludicrous proximity to the person in front gave the game away. If I can spot this, how comes TfL can't? Much easier to penalise someone with a RailCard that expired two days ago?

 

[Titfield]

And many more don't. The most common advice I've heard is if you see an inspector cooperate and pretend you can't find your ticket, presumably to try and pass the attitude test, and get the penalty fare. I doubt these people would even consider the forums.

I've never even considered fare evasion, but over the last few years I've heard of tens of ways to evade fares on both buses and trains, some of which are entirely unenforceable. The TOCs really invest some time in trying to find them out because with how often I hear and see them they must be losing a significant amount of money.

The TOCS may well be losing the money in the first instance, however given the Govts financial support for the railways then the reality is that fare evasion is costing the tax payer money.

 

[[.n]]

I absolutely think it will decrease fare evasion. It's a concerningly common view of students at the university I go to that the chances of getting your ticket checked if you travel at the right time is less than 50%, and so they travel ticketless and firm it if they get caught, as the net cost is less than if they bought tickets (None seem to be aware of the potential for prosecution). Most of these tickets are in the £20 range, so a minimum of £100 significantly increase the risk of the fare, and therefore makes this no longer financially justifiable.

One of the biggest group of fare evaders that I used to notice what actually in 1st class, commuters who knew the rules playing the system - even at £100 a time, it would probably still be cheaper in the long run [I'm ignoring the prosecution aspect - purely the PF aspect.]

 

[RPI]

I think it will deter the casual opportunist, the ones who will happily pay when challenged but go out of their way to be at the opposite end to the guard.

I'm not looking forward to enforcing it at first, £100 is right but it should have gradually increased years ago, though really its £50 + the applicable fare for the train that the passenger is on.

I think it will encourage more to pay up too, knowing that it goes up to £100 if not paid.

I'm purely guessing now, but I would say that at £100 TOC'S will actually chase these up through the civil courts in instances where a passenger appeals thus making a prosecution invalid through the magistrates Court.

 

[Fenchurch SP]

It may reduce evasion but could possibly reduce the overall revenue. It would discourage me from travelling by train because a mistake made by myself (like getting the wrong ticket or losing my ticket) could be so expensive.

 

[Cdd89]

I think the increased penalty will have a negative effect on evasion, and here’s why:

The railway likely operates on an “expected value” principle for evasion. For example, for a £5 journey, as long as [Penalty] * [Chance of Inspection] <= [Fare], evasion will not cause a loss in revenue. Accordingly TOCs will use this as a reason to reduce inspections as they can achieve similar revenue by stinging those caught hard — so fewer people will be detected.

I think lower penalties with a higher frequency would deter evasion more effectively, especially by passengers making the decision to evade impulsively (while being fairer to those who made a genuine mistake, although that aspect is OT for this thread).

The other reason I expect a limited impact is that it does nothing to reduce Contactless PAYG evasion, where rare penalty fares are not typically applied in the first place (with some exceptions; such as blocked cards, being witnessed not touching, or a passenger admission).

 

[Feuillesmortes]

As a mere passenger I find the evaders so easy to spot. Approaching the Kings Cross gateline from the Met Line last month, I just knew from the hood and the swagger that the guy ahead of me was going to tailgate the person in front. As a cover he even pressed something against the reader, but his ludicrous proximity to the person in front gave the game away.

Paper tickets and season tickets exist, without a need to touch out. Tailgating makes for a frictionless quick exit but doesn't necessarily mean fare evasion.

 

[js1000]

No, on the basis many of the revenue inspectors (i.e. sub-contractors) are not adequately trained in giving out large on-the-spot fines and are not in a position to be fair due to commission. The idea is fine but the execution by the TOCs is flawed.

 

[spag23]

Paper tickets and season tickets exist, without a need to touch out. Tailgating makes for a frictionless quick exit but doesn't necessarily mean fare evasion

On the contrary... At the KX Met/Circle gateline, when the barriers are set to "closed" (which - being double/triple-manned - they all are, 99% of the time), everyone does need a ticket of some sort to get through; be it pushing paper into a slot or touching a card or phone. In the incident I described, the miscreant didn't simply follow at a short distance, ie even 6"; he'd pressed himself hard into the honest traveller's back to create a single entity to the gate's detectors. If it happened anywhere else, it could arguably be regarded as an assault, especially on a person of the opposite sex.
On occasions I've seen such people lingering around the unused gates, waiting for someone to "merge" with.
I've even been the victim a few times. When there are loads of unused adjacent gates, if I become aware someone pushing hard against my back, I try to stop moving. But they just thrust me forward and run off, pulling the trademark hood over their faces.
If anyone from TfL is reading this thread, this location would yield many more - and more justified - prosecutions than out-of-date Railcards.

 

[WesternLancer]

A disproportionately large number of people who come to this forum are either overseas people on visas or are students (nearly all medical ones - draw your own conclusions!).

Yes, this is notable.
In the case of overseas residents (inc overseas students) there will be a dawning realisation after being caught that in the UK the associated risk of court prosecution will have the potential to impact on staying in UK / future visa applications including ones for permanent visas and thus potential risk to their future life plans. Creating a need for some advice.

With medical students, and I suspect law students, again a sudden realisation after being caught that this could have a serious impact on the career they are training for and they need to take steps to avoid risks to that. Tho I do find it strange that assuming they get taught about ethics as part of their courses (maybe they don't?) that you may not already relaise the potential consequences before you evade the fare.

So those things probably drive people to this forum, whereas other students say, who are still evaders are not balancing up those risks in quite the same way.

 

[spag23]

I do find it strange that assuming they get taught about ethics as part of their courses

Perhaps the university/colleges should include in their Welcome Pack a specific warning that fare evasion may be serious enough to negate their expensive education. This would be addressed to both domestic and overseas students, along with a brief description as to how Railcards work.
Or maybe they already do this?

 

[RPI]

No, on the basis many of the revenue inspectors (i.e. sub-contractors) are not adequately trained in giving out large on-the-spot fines and are not in a position to be fair due to commission. The idea is fine but the execution by the TOCs is flawed.

Commission? Who gets Commission on penalty fares? Certainly no one at the TOC i work for nor any others that I know.

 

[skyhigh]

No, on the basis many of the revenue inspectors (i.e. sub-contractors) are not adequately trained in giving out large on-the-spot fines and are not in a position to be fair due to commission.

Please give an example of a TOC where people get commission on Penalty Fares.

 

[RPI]

Please give an example of a TOC where people get commission on Penalty Fares.

Precisely. At the TOC I work for Ticket Examiners (who are PF trained) get commission on their ticket sales so actually makes it more likely to be sold a ticket if we're generalising.

 

[swt_passenger]

Paper tickets and season tickets exist, without a need to touch out. Tailgating makes for a frictionless quick exit but doesn't necessarily mean fare evasion.

You’re seriously suggesting people are tailgating rather than using their paper ticket or season? I don’t believe it, I’m afraid.

 

[Haywain]

You’re seriously suggesting people are tailgating rather than using their paper ticket or season? I don’t believe it, I’m afraid.

I'm sure it happens - there are many seson ticket holders who apparently regard it as a serious inconvenience to have to take their paper ticket out of the wallet it lives in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You’re seriously suggesting people are tailgating rather than using their paper ticket or season? I don’t believe it, I’m afraid.

I have done it by accident when the person in front's ticket was rejected and they ended up going through on mine. Never deliberately, and I recall it actually breaches a Byelaw so technically could be prosecuted (but not PFed) even if a valid ticket is held.

 

[Horizon22]

Certain chancers bank on only being caught 1 in X times and know they can make the £20 difference by not paying for all the other times. So yes, I think it may make people think twice.

However, I am not sure how dramatic it will be.

 

[RPI]

Certain chancers bank on only being caught 1 in X times and know they can make the £20 difference by not paying for all the other times. So yes, I think it may make people think twice.

However, I am not sure how dramatic it will be.

People openly admit it when stopped, people on some lines just hold the bank card out or have a 20 note there ready, if they travel every day they may get stopped by a guard twice a week and asked to buy a ticket and stopped by an RPI or keen Ticket Examiner perhaps once a fortnight, even then they may get sold a ticket. Its probably a chance worth taking in their eyes.
With it being £50 (let's face it, its not £100 is it) a few may not take the chance and I think they'll be less willing to co-operate when stopped too.

We'll see! I'll let you all know in a couple of weeks!

 

[Starmill]

I think that it depends an awful lot on context. The £20 minimum and any perceived issues with it have been around for a very long time since it increased from £10. Why has the Department acted now? It has been rumoured it's seen as a precursor to saving money by doing less enforcement, for example downsizing on third party revenue staff at contract end dates, or reorganising in-house roles. There's definitely a view that some operators don't need as many revenue staff as the have currently. What will actually happen is very unpredictable, though, given every DfT operator has a trade union dispute on its hands.

 

[jon0844]

We'll see! I'll let you all know in a couple of weeks!

I think most TOCs intend to have a grace period so it might be some time in February before we know properly.

I guess we'll know how long the grace periods are by the time it takes for the first post on here!!

I think that it depends an awful lot on context. The £20 minimum and any perceived issues with it have been around for a very long time since it increased from £10. Why has the Department acted now? It has been rumoured it's seen as a precursor to saving money by doing less enforcement, for example downsizing on third party revenue staff at contract end dates, or reorganising in-house roles. There's definitely a view that some operators don't need as many revenue staff as the have currently. What will actually happen is very unpredictable, though, given every DfT operator has a trade union dispute on its hands.

If the DfT tried to go back to the old 'open' days of BR, albeit with gates that anyone can push through or just buy an e-ticket at the gateline and use immediately instead of just walking out as in the past, they're going to lose an awful lot of money.

We don't seem to be a nation of honest people anymore, and the more opportunities you give, the more people will take them. It's unlikely we're going to see enough checks on trains to solve the problem, as surely the DfT will want to cut money there.