revenue protection or scaremongering and revenue maximisation??

[fairguy]

I have noticed that ticket inspectors guys from FCC always refuse people offering to pay fine at train stations when something wrong with ticket (wrong zone, wront ticket, no photocard etc..)

Do you think it is correct to get people to just sign an almsot blank form. The FCC guys get people to sign a form then complete the form when person is allowed to go.

FCC seems to be ignoring the 99 times people pay their fare and choose to create problems for the same person who had wrong ticket on just one occasion.

They seem to take principle that it was your intention to defraud.

is this fair?? they seem to never give benefit of the doubt.

 

[185]

Whilst sadly a lot of people do fraudulently travel, that should never, ever happen.

 

[Gathursty]

If FCC are completing forms after a passenger has signed them, isn't there some deception going on here or are passengers fools for signing blank pieces of paper?

I'm sure there is an episode of Only Fools and Horses where Delboy gets a crap karaoke singer to sign a piece of paper without having read the particulars first.

 

[Class377]

Perhaps it's seen as easier to get everyone's details and let them off after the event, than to let everyone pay when challenged and allow the actual fare evaders to slip through?

 

[hounddog]

Does the passenger not get a copy of what they've signed to prevent alterations at a later stage?

 

[swt_passenger]

I have noticed that ticket inspectors guys from FCC always refuse people offering to pay fine at train stations when something wrong with ticket (wrong zone, wront ticket, no photocard etc..)

Are these people 'offering to pay fine' those who have invalid tickets, and therefore think they have some sort of entitlement to demand a penalty fare? Then they are wrong. Penalty fares are not an entitlement, they are at the railway staff's discretion when people make a mistake...

 

[EM2]

I have noticed that ticket inspectors guys from FCC always refuse people offering to pay fine at train stations when something wrong with ticket (wrong zone, wront ticket, no photocard etc..)

Yet I have personally witnessed many revenue staff collecting payments...

 

[fowler9]

Are these people 'offering to pay fine' those who have invalid tickets, and therefore think they have some sort of entitlement to demand a penalty fare? Then they are wrong. Penalty fares are not an entitlement, they are at the railway staff's discretion when people make a mistake...

Getting people to sign something and then altering it afterwards is also wrong if that is what is happening, in fact it is massively wrong.

 

[455driver]

So we have a new poster who thinks it's unfair that people with invalid tickets are not allowed to pay a penalty fare when they are caught and instead their details are taken with a view to prosecution!
Is that right?

A penalty fare is reserved for somebody who the RPI considers has made a genuine mistake, not for people who go out of their zones and then want to pay when challenged, it is your responsibility to ensure you ticket(s) cover your complete journey before boarding the train*.

Maybe you should post what is really bothering you on the disputes section of the forum!

* there are certain exceptions to this which are not normally relevant to a FCC thread.

 

[swt_passenger]

Getting people to sign something and then altering it afterwards is also wrong if that is what is happening, in fact it is massively wrong.

So do you think that is definitely happening, based on one poster's assumptions? Or has he got an issue with the whole process because he wasn't given the penalty fare he was hoping for?

 

[fowler9]

So do you think that is definitely happening, based on one poster's assumptions? Or has he got an issue with the whole process because he wasn't given the penalty fare he was hoping for?

Not at all mate. If it did happen it would be massively wrong. That is all I meant.

 

[jon0844]

'Always' is a bold claim when I can't imagine the OP has followed that many RPIs.

And if it was always, how was it I sat next to a woman approaching Gatwick who was checked after East Croydon and was traveling with an Oyster - who was allowed to pay the standard fare? No PF, no statement taken. Just some discretion used.

RPIs judge every situation as they see it there and then. If anything I'd say too many people are given PFs who don't deserve one, but more staff are being trained to do reports for prosecution all the time.

In which case, making sure you have a valid ticket is probably a good idea.

 

[revenueadvice]

If we take a statement under caution the person signs the pro forma to agree that what they said is what is written down. The top of the form is the passenger details and some bits for the rpi to fill in. This could be blank at the time as the passenger has given details in the inspectors note book, he will then transfer them to the pro forma. The ONLY thing the passenger is signing for is the statement under caution.

 

[island]

[Pedant] A document with blanks you fill in is a form. Pro forma is an adjective (and not a noun) meaning "for the sake of convention", such as "pro forma invoice" which is an invoice issued for the sake of form in the event goods have not been supplied yet.[/pedant]

 

[causton]

Getting people to sign something and then altering it afterwards is also wrong if that is what is happening, in fact it is massively wrong.

Happened to a friend I travelled home from London with once - as they had the money on them, just the date, time, to/from and reason was filled out, no personal details, hand over the £20, RPI scribbles over any blank sections so nothing else can be added, signatures, hands back copy for you to keep, job done.

I imagine with the amount they have to give out this makes things a lot quicker than finding and verifying their details when they are willing to pay the money straight away...

...if it's not the correct procedure I could understand why though!

 

[RJ]

Do you think it is correct to get people to just sign an almsot blank form. The FCC guys get people to sign a form then complete the form when person is allowed to go.

So the passenger is not obliged to leave. They're not obliged to stay either once they've provided their details. If someone excercises their right to walk away, why be outraged on their behalf? I will always watch a ticket inspector fill out a form against me, but there's no chance of me signing it if it contains anything other than objective, unambiguous facts

 

[DarloRich]

This thread sums up the holier than thou attitude of many. We all know fare evasion is wrong and a potentially criminal matter. Do we have to keep saying it?

If IF the OP is correct that RPI are having alleged offenders sign a blank form this is wrong. It should not happen and should be challenged where it does. It also makes it possible for a case to fail allowing a wrong doer to escape conviction.

 

[Fare-Cop]

If we take a statement under caution the person signs the pro forma to agree that what they said is what is written down. The top of the form is the passenger details and some bits for the rpi to fill in. This could be blank at the time as the passenger has given details in the inspectors note book, he will then transfer them to the pro forma. The ONLY thing the passenger is signing for is the statement under caution.

I understand that you are saying that may be what some staff actually do on some TOCs, but if such action is tolerated by their management it smacks of poor training and poor front line practice.

Having made some pre-caution notes in a pocket book the inspector may well already have the alleged offender's details and having conducted a brief interview in accordance with P.A.C.E. (84) C.o.P. using a pro-forma, s/he must also ensure that the person being interviewed sees that their details have been correctly recorded on that form.

The travellers' signature also confirms that these details are what has been provided as name & address and are therefore a material part of the report.

Inspectors who report to me who might be seen getting blank or incomplete forms signed before all the details have been entered, checked & agreed by the alleged offender would very quickly find themselves taken off the job.

 

[fowler9]

I hope I never gave the impression that I approve of fare dodging but any member of staff who gets a customer to sign something and then puts something on the form afterwards Must surely have altered evidence. I don't accept that the customer only signs for the statement. You will generally sign something to say that you accept that everything on a form is correct. If someone stuck extra stuff on afterwards I would be interested to know how that would stand up in court. If I am wrong then by all means let me know.

 

[Flamingo]

Before everybody falls over themselves about condemning this, the only person who has said this is happening is the OP, who made a grand total of one post, and has not been back since.

Pound to a penny, the post was motivated by a certain degree of sour grapes about not being given the option of a PF after being detected in attempted fare evasion.