Stansted Airport station queues and railcard app not working

[duncanp]

Agree.

It'd be sensible to apply the "forgotten Railcard" approach to it, but without eating one of the "strikes", as a blanket policy. That is issue a PF which is cancelled on sending a screenshot of the valid Railcard.

That sounds like a sensible solution, which is why the railway will probably not adopt it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think in a scenario where there is a widespread known failure of the app, the railway should just accept the word of anyone who says they have a Railcard. Taking details and following the forgotten Railcard procedure for that many people is impractical, not to mention a waste of time for passengers who've done nothing wrong.

Agree, these things should be communicated, but if they haven't then the forgotten Railcard process does allow for a Railcard not being presented without anyone getting prosecuted.

 

[fandroid]

minimum of two hours between train arrival and flight departure is prudent (some travel insurance companies would insist on three if they were to pay out).

I have been regularly flying short-haul to Europe for over ten years, mostly from Heathrow. Except when there are specific warnings of security delays, I have only ever allowed 90 mins at the airport. Only twice in that time I've used up all of my spare time and arrived at the gate during boarding. I've never missed a flight. The bad delays have always been on my journey to Heathrow.

 

[sheff1]

Railway staff are explicitly permitted by the Regulation of Railways Act to detain passengers who do not have a valid ticket, so no assault has been committed.

The OP did have a valid ticket.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The OP did have a valid ticket.

But were unable to present a valid Railcard. That wasn't their fault, but having a faulty speedometer you were unaware of isn't a defence to a speeding charge either.

RoRA requires intent and is not applicable, but the Byelaws absolutely are, and having run off does not help the OP's case at all.

 

[fandroid]

Would it be worth complaining to the management of Stansted Airport? They should be rather cheesed off that their airport is having to suffer because of GA's inadequate facilities for rail ticket checks. Complain about the length of queues. No need to go into detail about Railcards and the staff member's actions.

 

[sheff1]

But were unable to present a valid Railcard. That wasn't their fault, but having a faulty speedometer you were unaware of isn't a defence to a speeding charge either.

RoRA requires intent and is not applicable, but the Byelaws absolutely are, and having run off does not help the OP's case at all.

I know, but the post I quoted stated that RoRA explicity permitted the detaining of passengers who do not have a valid ticket and hence no assault had been committed.

I am not familar with the laws around assualt, but it cannot be correct that no assault had been committed solely due to a clause in an Act which is not relevant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I know, but the post I quoted stated that RoRA explicity permitted the detaining of passengers who do not have a valid ticket.

Ah, that provision, not the one you'd prosecute under. That's about the intent of the member of staff, not the passenger.

If you have a ticket but not (for whatever reason) the accompanying Railcard, then you don't have a valid ticket.

To make this totally clear, I think this all absolutely stinks to high heaven, but we deal with the law as it is, not how we would want it to be.

 

[Haywain]

Agree, these things should be communicated, but if they haven't then the forgotten Railcard process does allow for a Railcard not being presented without anyone getting prosecuted.

And that may have been what would have happened in this case, as the railcard holder's details would have to be taken for this process to be used.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And that may have been what would have happened in this case, as the railcard holder's details would have to be taken for this process to be used.

True. What didn't help (and never helps) was the OP running off.

 

[Howardh]

After the horse has bolted, but if anyone is relying on an app or mobile ticket, make sure you do and save a screenshot in case the apps fail. If you can, also print off the ticket when you download them and then you are about as covered as you can be. Makes a mockery of the convenience of having something on your phone.

 

[All Line Rover]

Now arrived.

The railcard's terms says: "You must be able to show your valid Railcard on a mobile device throughout your journey."

https://www.26-30railcard.co.uk/help/railcard-terms-conditions/

I was able to do so, as my device was in perfect working order. I think it is clear that the clause is drafted with this in mind (i.e. that the passenger's device is working, not that the passenger must somehow assume responsibility for the railway's IT infrastructure).

There is nothing in the terms which states what a "valid Railcard" is supposed to look like. In my view, if a railcard looks odd because the app is glitching, it is still a valid railcard.

I don't agree that walking away in response to an unreasonable instruction can be characterised as "running off".

 

[duncanp]

Interestingly there is another similar thread regarding the Railcard app.

Railcard app version suddenly not supported

Same with me re: update notification/Railcard not showing on a Huawei P30 Pro. Deleted app and reinstalled but the new download code gave an error. Deleted the device from the account and started from scratch on an iPhone but another download code not accepted on that either. They had...

www.railforums.co.uk

This is something that the rail industry will have to address as we beocme increasingly reliant on apps.

 

[furlong]

Railway staff are explicitly permitted by the Regulation of Railways Act to detain passengers who do not have a valid ticket, so no assault has been committed.

Both this and the citizen's arrest are difficult powers to use correctly.
For RORA, there's been no mention of a refusal to supply name and address, one of the pre-requisites.
For citizen's arrest, which indictable offence could there have been reasonable grounds for suspecting (given also the reason stated at the time)? (And no such arrest occurred anyway.)

An accusation of assault however is an occupational hazard in circumstances such as these, with the likelihood of supporting CCTV evidence in that location.

It's oft reported on here that many staff are instructed to avoid using these powers, partly due to the minefield they enter when they try.

The app prevents screenshots.

 

[All Line Rover]

Would it be worth complaining to the management of Stansted Airport? They should be rather cheesed off that their airport is having to suffer because of GA's inadequate facilities for rail ticket checks. Complain about the length of queues. No need to go into detail about Railcards and the staff member's actions.

Two strangers sat in front of me on the flight had this conversation:

"I used smething called the Stansted Express to the airport. At the station, everyone was being funnelled through a narrow queue. I said to myself "This is supposed to be the express service, what are they playing at?" If it wasn't for the fact that [SUCH-AND-SUCH-AIRPORT] is only served by flights from Stansted, I wouldn't use Stansted again."

"Yeah, me neither."

I agree, the airport management should take an interest.

The app prevents screenshots.

Today it is allowing it.

 

[LowLevel]

If it would help your peace of mind I will happily supply a screenshot of an internal message advising that the railcard app is broken.

 

[AlterEgo]

If it would help your peace of mind I will happily supply a screenshot of an internal message advising that the railcard app is broken.

Was this an all staff brief? Incredible the guys at Stansted didn’t know if this.

 

[LowLevel]

This was issued by Cross Country Trains at 0928 this morning.

Was this an all staff brief? Incredible the guys at Stansted didn’t know if this.

I'm not sure, but I don't work for Cross Country and could access that and was aware of the issue, so if GA haven't made their staff aware that's on them, given XC also serve Stansted Airport. I've used that one as it's the easiest one for me to reproduce.

 

[furlong]

Today it is allowing it.

Interesting. It is a while since I was forced to experiment with one, and I had to use a second phone to take a photo of it as a backup.

 

[island]

The app prevents screenshots.

iOS apps cannot prevent screenshots, though perhaps the OP was using a different phone system.

 

[LowLevel]

The official twitter page @_railcards is also reporting technical issues. If it was me I'd gather as much of this evidence as possible given the staff member scanned the ticket and thus may have access to details.

 

[island]

For RORA, there's been no mention of a refusal to supply name and address, one of the pre-requisites.

Walking off up an escalator is a clear indication of refusal to give name and address.

Additionally, section 3 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 gives any person a right to use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for prevention of crime, the crime in this case being the failure to provide details when suspected of a ticketing violation.

In short, it is very inadvisable for the OP to maintain a claim of being assaulted by the staff member.

 

[All Line Rover]

I would have been happy to provide a name and address if asked. That would have taken all of 60 seconds. The train operator could then have followed up in writing if it considered this worthwhile. An apology would have been nice.

I did not agree to queuing a second time and running the risk of missing an expensive, infrequent flight.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Now arrived.

The railcard's terms says: "You must be able to show your valid Railcard on a mobile device throughout your journey."

https://www.26-30railcard.co.uk/help/railcard-terms-conditions/

I was able to do so, as my device was in perfect working order. I think it is clear that the clause is drafted with this in mind (i.e. that the passenger's device is working, not that the passenger must somehow assume responsibility for the railway's IT infrastructure).

There is nothing in the terms which states what a "valid Railcard" is supposed to look like. In my view, if a railcard looks odd because the app is glitching, it is still a valid railcard.

I don't agree that walking away in response to an unreasonable instruction can be characterised as "running off".

Unfortunately, the law is not on your side.

Once again, I think this is grossly unfair. However, we deal with the law as it is and not how you would want it to be.

 

[AlterEgo]

Walking off up an escalator is a clear indication of refusal to give name and address.

I'm not sure the OP was ever asked for their name and address though?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I did not agree to queuing a second time and running the risk of missing an expensive, infrequent flight.

I think there's a lesson you can choose to learn there if you wish.

Sure, your backup plan is a taxi. But what if the delay occurs on plain line?

I'm not sure the OP was ever asked for their name and address though?

The OP was asked to see a member of staff to deal with the matter. Instead, they ran off.

 

[AlterEgo]

The OP was asked to see a member of staff to deal with the matter. Instead, they ran off.

Yes, understood, but I cannot think that this is a "refuse to provide name and address" when they weren't, apparently, asked for their name or address. Just to see someone else.

As far as I can tell the only jeopardy is a bylaw offence here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

View attachment 137316

This was issued by Cross Country Trains at 0928 this morning.


I'm not sure, but I don't work for Cross Country and could access that and was aware of the issue, so if GA haven't made their staff aware that's on them, given XC also serve Stansted Airport. I've used that one as it's the easiest one for me to reproduce.

Greater Anglia is the main TOC at the station so the RPIs were almost certainly acting for them. It's possible they hadn't put the brief out or the staff hadn't seen it. Or just that the member of staff the OP was asked to see would have asked to see what the OP had, heard their explanation and accepted it.

Very often station blocks are carried out with security staff who can do 90% of the role, then they can refer anyone with anything complex to a properly trained RPI who would be able to understand what was going on.

Yes, understood, but I cannot think that this is a "refuse to provide name and address" when they weren't, apparently, asked for their name or address. Just to see someone else.

As far as I can tell the only jeopardy is a bylaw offence here.

Yes, probably correct, on reflection.

Byelaw 18 is thus:

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:
   1. 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
   2. there was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket or
   3. an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket

If the Railcard was working at the time of starting the journey (I always make a point to check mine just to ensure it hasn't expired) then (1) hasn't been breached, but it could have been argued to be breached if it was not working at that point.

I could however see how the act of running off could be seen as breaching (2) when the OP had been asked to produce a ticket to a specific member of staff and had declined to do so, instead running off. An authorised person asked the OP to produce the ticket and Railcard to a specific person, and didn't. Notably (2) doesn't require the ticket to be valid, just for it to be produced.

Hmm. On balance I'd say the OP would have a valid complaint if they hadn't run off, but as they did pursuing this would be extremely unwise.

Another thought.

This appears to have a bit of a parallel (though under different legislation) with someone who was driving to the airport, was running late due to things that weren't their fault, then were rear-ended at a roundabout but drove off due to not having time to exchange details. They'd still have committed an offence of not stopping at the scene of an accident despite not having caused it (though unlike this case could mitigate it by reporting the accident at a police station within 24 hours). In the end it's necessary to leave enough time for unexpected delays as well as expected ones, or to accept that occasionally a flight might be missed.

 

[furlong]

Walking off up an escalator is a clear indication of refusal to give name and address.

In law though, the question must be asked before that power is engaged.

Additionally, section 3 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 gives any person a right to use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for prevention of crime, the crime in this case being the failure to provide details when suspected of a ticketing violation

I remain unconvinced - providing details seems too many steps removed (no thought crimes!).

 

[All Line Rover]

X did not ask me to show the ticket/railcard to the other staff member. X asked me to queue for that staff member, apparently to discuss the faulty railcard app with them. For an ongoing technical issue which the industry is already aware of, there is nothing to discuss.