Summons for failing to submit a rail ticket??

[Kristofferson]

OTHER PEOPLE ARE NOT LIKE US. You CAN NOT ASSUME that other people will know this... If the system allows people to keep making mistakes, and makes it difficult to recover from those mistakes, then the system needs fixing.

I don't usually come by this part of the forum, but stumbled upon this thread and must say I completely agree with this statement. It's only through being an "enthusaiast" that I know to carefully check ticket validity, routing, the oddities of Travelcard zones etc.

If I was just going from the posters and maybe a quick glance at the TFL website, I don't feel like I'd be able to find the best value ticket, be aware of all the restrictions and routing quirks, or be adequately educated about the severity of making a mistake in my ticket choice.

 

[sarahj]

All I can say to the OP is never ever fly Ryan Air to Frankfurt (hahn). You will get a nasty surprise.

 

[Agent_c]

All I can say to the OP is never ever fly Ryan Air to Frankfurt (hahn). You will get a nasty surprise.

Although having to fly RyanAir is of course Nasty, if you've bought the ticket I wouldn't characterize it as a surprise...

 

[30907]

The question was, did they consider themselves living in London, not what their train situation was.
I repeat, they do not consider they live in London!
And having spoken to my brother in law who lives in Warlingham, neither does he.
They all say they live in SURREY!!

I grew up in Beckenham, Kent. It doesn't have a London postal address, but has been part of the London Borough of Bromley since 1965.
I worked for 3 years in Buckhurst Hill, Essex. Still not part of Greater London, and the locals (almost all of them Londoners BTW) insisted on that.

 

[TonyR]

I'm reminded of:

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

 

[reb0118]

Your earlier comment about Courts starting at 0930 being too early also does you no favours.

Agreed.

Some of us have been at work for 4 hours by then!

Lightweight!

 

[Llanigraham]

Lightweight!

Huh!!
But I'd still have another 8 hours before I finished! :roll:

 

[bb21]

Regarding your point (in bold), that's precisely my point. I was sure that Gatwick was very much a part of London. Which is why I decided to use my contactless card. It wasn't a matter of 'Oh is Gatwick in London? Can I use my Contactless for this trip? I better ask.'
It was 'Well, the airport website says London Gatwick, my flight ticket says London Gatwick, the journey planner has a straight forward route presentation to Gatwick (with no disclaimer/ warning to avoid using a Contactless). Brilliant, I'll just use my contactless card for this'

Because, I am led to assume that you can use your Contactless anywhere in London and also see advertisements for Sussex Gatwick (as I know call it) as 'Your London airport'.
And it's for this reason you have penalties being handed out to unknowing punters who think the same way. It's Londoners (like myself) who get caught out too.

And whilst there is information on the website, you do as viabank kindly put it earlier, have to go on a treasure trail to find it.

So you made a mistake in assuming Gatwick being in London then? Can't really blame TfL for that as it wasn't their fault you made that assumption.

That was the real cause of all the problems.

Why don't you send the airport operator a bill for your financial loss? After all their misleading advertising caused you to believe something that isn't true. If they refuse to budge, take them to small claims court...

 

[bnm]

So you made a mistake in assuming Gatwick being in London then?

OP made the mistake along with countless others.

I was at Gatwick Airport station a week or so ago. Hanging around, I counted 7 people in the space of 20 minutes being dealt with by RPIs. Earwigging a bit, my impression was that all had travelled from central London with what they though were valid tickets.

Not enough is being done by train operators to prevent people boarding services to Gatwick with incorrect tickets. But then, why bother when so much income is generated from the penalties?

 

[bb21]

OP made the mistake along with countless others.

I was at Gatwick Airport station a week or so ago. Hanging around, I counted 7 people in the space of 20 minutes being dealt with by RPIs. Earwigging a bit, my impression was that all had travelled from central London with what they though were valid tickets.

Not enough is being done by train operators to prevent people boarding services to Gatwick with incorrect tickets. But then, why bother when so much income is generated from the penalties?

I think it would be interesting to see the statistics on how many Penalty Fares were actually issued at Gatwick Airport, mindful of the fact that snapshot observations can be deceiving, as sometimes I have seen numerous people being dealt with within the short period I hang around the station, while other times none whatsoever.

I do agree that more can be done, for example, several suggestions put forward in this very thread have their merits, and it would be absurd to claim that the current situation is perfect. Then again perfection is not really possible with everyone having different needs. There will always be things that can be done better.

What I do not agree with is that somehow the blame lies with TfL in this case simply because these measures have not been put in place. As I mentioned before, TfL's publicity is one of the most comprehensive in the world, and as a proportion of all passengers, those who experience problems are only in the very small minority, with the overwhelming majority of those to be at fault themselves somewhat. I think the tone of the responses the OP received had much to do with his reluctance to accept the part his own actions played in this very episode.

 

[ian959]

Again, you misunderstand.
Geographically, I know and understand that Gatwick is a part of Sussex. But I, along with all who get similar penalties, are led to believe that Gatwick is part of the London network. Because it is touted as London Gatwick. Furthermore, there aren't any clear indications (by GTR/ TFL) to restrict people from using their contactless/ Oyster for the same.
Therefore misleading people to use a Contactless because it is 'London' Gatwick. Hope that makes sense?

What a load of rubbish.

There is NOTHING suggesting that Gatwick is in the London network. Indeed by its very nature Transport for London ONLY operates in London and since it does NOT go to Gatwick everything suggests that contactless is NOT available to Gatwick.

 

[Greenback]

Again, you misunderstand.
Geographically, I know and understand that Gatwick is a part of Sussex. But I, along with all who get similar penalties, are led to believe that Gatwick is part of the London network. Because it is touted as London Gatwick. Furthermore, there aren't any clear indications (by GTR/ TFL) to restrict people from using their contactless/ Oyster for the same.
Therefore misleading people to use a Contactless because it is 'London' Gatwick. Hope that makes sense?

Basically, you made assumptions about Gatwick Airport because of a lot of stuff not produce by the operator of that network, ie adverts for the airport, the airport website, and your flight tickets to name but a few.

Yet, when you plan your journey on TfL's own website, although your are allowed to enter London Gatwick Airport byu the system, the results default to show Gatwick Airport railway station.

Yet, TfL needs to stick a disclaimer on there to counteract all of the sites and adverts that do stick London in front of the advert name, even though those sites are nothing to do with them?

And TOC's need to broadcast message telling people that despite the campaign by airports, airlines and others to convenience the traveller that airports like Gatwick, despite serving London rather than being in London, are not part of the capital's transport network.

I am genuinely confused by the thought processes of the alleged numbers of people who are being penalised at Gatwick. As bb21 says, what we have is by no means perfect, but I really don't understand why someone would rely on adverts and branding, which don't exactly say that contactless and Oyster are valid to Gatwick, over asking a simple question or at least attempting to verify their assumption in other ways. And that's what it was , an assumption, because no matter how sure they were that they were right, the OP didn't see anything concrete to say contactless is valid, they simply put 2 and 2 together and got 5.

Maybe Londoners have such a brilliant transport network with such easy ways of paying for travel that it's more wishful thinking in wanting this to extend to places like Gatwick?

 

[snail]

Yet, when you plan your journey on TfL's own website, although your are allowed to enter London Gatwick Airport byu the system, the results default to show Gatwick Airport railway station.

Yet, TfL needs to stick a disclaimer on there to counteract all of the sites and adverts that do stick London in front of the advert name, even though those sites are nothing to do with them?

This is the only part of this argument where I have a little (and only a little) sympathy for the OP and their supporters: If you enter a journey search on TfL that starts or ends outside their operating area then it would be helpful to have a warning saying just that. Not a lengthy list of valid or invalid stations, just a warning to check validity of your paper/Oyster/contactless ticket before travelling.

 

[sarahj]

Short of stopping every punter before they board a train calling at Gatwick, I'm not sure what more can be done. I make announcements, some folks speak to me and want to 'upgrade' asap. Some folks dont/wont listen. 'I never heard anything' says the person with the headphones. Sometimes I check trains and find none, sometimes I find 5 or 6 with their oysters/freedoms/contactless/6 zone travelcards.
And these are on trains that have a guard. The OP was on a TL train, so poss no on board check.

Basic rule, esp for the South, going passed the M25. No oyster/Freedom or contactless.


As for Oyster being used to Gatwick, how will that work, what fare will be charged, gat ex, southern, tl only? Will it be a £17.00 hit from Vic any permitted, or a £5.10. Croydon to Gatwick charge. And what about those that want to go to Horley, Redhill, Merstham??? If Gatwick accepts them, why not these stations.
'well i used my oyster last week to Gatwick, and this is closer.'
And then if Gatwick, why not Luton, Southend, Biggin Hill.......

Other Ryan air destinations: (forgive the spelling)

Beauvois (paris)
Billund (copenhagen)
Charloi (Brussels)

 

[Via Bank]

For a start, for Thameslink, replacing the pointless London Underground service information tagged onto the end of the list of calling points with the words "OYSTER/CONTACTLESS NOT VALID PAST EAST CROYDON" would be a good start. This could be done at Victoria too.

Then, perhaps, making sure that there is a PIS actually on the trains (there is no PIS on the majority of 319s) and making sure it is actually working. Hell, even posters inside the trains saying "going outside London or to Gatwick? Check you have a valid ticket, you can't use Oyster" might be worthwhile.

I was under the impression an Oyster/Contactless extension to all stations to Gatwick was in the works, but God knows how that's going to work. If I had it my way there'd be a flat fare from each origin station, but those in charge of GatEx revenue would certainly not be happy with that.

Finally, perhaps allowing outboundary passengers the opportunity to buy an extension at their destination or on board might be a nice idea, rather than immediately slapping them with a PF or a UFN.

 

[EM2]

For a start, for Thameslink, replacing the pointless London Underground service information tagged onto the end of the list of calling points with the words "OYSTER/CONTACTLESS NOT VALID PAST EAST CROYDON" would be a good start. This could be done at Victoria too.

Which is done on the CIS at St Pancras, before you get to the platforms and visible before you pass the barriers, and it still happens.

 

[Via Bank]

Which is done on the CIS at St Pancras, before you get to the platforms and visible before you pass the barriers, and it still happens.

Really? Today it was displaying this:

As an experiment I went down to Platform A at St. Pancras looking for this information (where Oyster/Contactless is accepted) and eventually found it: in one of the poster slots on the far end of the platform, there was a network map with the Oyster area shaded (but the text indicating what the shaded area meant was frankly tiny.)

I cannot help, as TonyR said, be reminded of the locked filing cabinet in the disused lavatory with the sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard." You need to really go looking for this information, and really be hyper-attentive to everything around you. Given how important it is, that seems wrong.

 

[Spurs]

The problem is an obvious conflict of interests: the TOCs benefit here when the passengers make a mistake, so they have zero incentive to increase public awareness of the rules. Would it be totally unviable for the regulator to introduce new guidelines, such that any income received from penalty fares above and beyond what they reasonably believe to be lost to fare evasion on any given route is passed on to the Department of Transport?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

If I hadn't been reading this thread, then if I had been asked if Oyster can be used for travel between central London and Gatwick, I know I would have hesitated in replying.
I feel confident that my answer, after some reflection, would have been "no" or "I don't think so, you'd better check" but to my mind it is not 'obvious' that the answer is no. I even hesitated for a moment reading sarahj's advice : "Basic rule, esp for the South, going passed the M25. No oyster/Freedom or contactless" before I was sure that Gatwick was outside the M25 (yes, I used to travel to Brighton every week, but for a moment, the sequence was uncertain).

But I have to say that when in these situations, I simply ask. I had reason to take advice on an Oyster question a couple of months ago while I was at St Pancras. There were plenty staff to ask, and I was given exactly the answer I needed instantly. I really don't see the need for the entrenched and opposing views on here to become even more insistent that "it's obvoiusly not valid" or "the railway Companies are deliberately being obscure".
If in doubt - ask.
If there's no one to ask, take the safer option.

 

[EM2]

Really? Today it was displaying this:

As an experiment I went down to Platform A at St. Pancras looking for this information (where Oyster/Contactless is accepted) and eventually found it: in one of the poster slots on the far end of the platform, there was a network map with the Oyster area shaded (but the text indicating what the shaded area meant was frankly tiny.)

I cannot help, as TonyR said, be reminded of the locked filing cabinet in the disused lavatory with the sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard." You need to really go looking for this information, and really be hyper-attentive to everything around you. Given how important it is, that seems wrong.

The CIS should interleave between various screens. Did you watch the screen to see if the information changed?
I notice you missed the map on the wall on the right-hand side of the concourse behind the barrier line?
And the manned ticket office?
And the manned information desk on the left of the barrier line?
And the staff manning the barrier line?
And the staff around on the concourse?
Any of those could have provided the information you needed.

 

[najaB]

If in doubt - ask.
If there's no one to ask, take the safer option.

Excellent advice that would have avoided the OP being caught out.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The problem is an obvious conflict of interests: the TOCs benefit here when the passengers make a mistake, so they have zero incentive to increase public awareness of the rules. Would it be totally unviable for the regulator to introduce new guidelines, such that any income received from penalty fares above and beyond what they reasonably believe to be lost to fare evasion on any given route is passed on to the Department of Transport?

What? Are you saying this is a deliberate conspiracy by the TOCs? There was nothing to stop the OP going to a member of staff and asking the question. Is it OK to use my contactless bank card on the barrier to go to Gatwick?

People need to take responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Via Bank]

The CIS should interleave between various screens. Did you watch the screen to see if the information changed?

I stayed there for some time, and it wasn't even alternating between page one and page two of the engineering works notice, simply showing the first page which cuts off mid-sentence. This is a problem that no-one at Thameslink seems to have taken the care to notice.

The same goes for the identical screen on the escalator landing on Platform A.

I notice you missed the map on the wall on the right-hand side of the concourse behind the barrier line?

I was actively looking for any clue to Oyster validity and didn't see the one behind the barrier line. That implies that it is not obvious enough.

And I come back to my point about the map itself: one has to really, properly scrutinise it to see that Oyster is not valid to Gatwick. (And if we are being pedantic, no mention at all is made about Contactless cards.) Unfortunately I didn't get a photo of it, but the text indicating that "Oyster can be used in the shaded area" is tiny and not somewhere immediately obvious.

And the manned ticket office?
And the manned information desk on the left of the barrier line?
And the staff manning the barrier line?
And the staff around on the concourse?
Any of those could have provided the information you needed.

You need to actively seek out this information (which will be no good if it's at night and the ticket office is closed and the barrier is open, or—as will happen next week—if the ticket office is shut completely for refurbishment.)

If you have no reason to believe that Oyster/Contactless would not be valid to Gatwick (as the OP did) there is no reason you would seek out this information whatsoever.

I would also point to Thameslink's own pages about Oyster and Contactless, all of which use the wooly statement that it is valid for "getting around London." Neither page has any mention of the boundaries. On their page about Gatwick, there is not a shred of evidence to suggest that Oyster or Contactless wouldn't be valid. I have to click through to "more information about Gatwick", then expand the Ticket Office section, before I finally find the information I want:

To continue my experiment, I also took a train from St. Pancras to East Croydon (then continuing via Gatwick to Three Bridges.) There was, to Thameslink's credit, a single PIS announcement on the approach to East Croydon that Oyster was not valid beyond the next station. But by my reckoning it lasted ten seconds and was not repeated, so if you weren't paying attention, or couldn't hear it due to a PA fault or ambient noise, it would have been very easy to miss it.

As DaveNewcastle says, if in doubt, ask. But, when plenty of people repeatedly turn up at GTW in no doubt (mistakenly) that they can use their Oyster or contactless, clearly the information that Oyster/CPC is only valid as far as Coulsdon South is not advertised clearly enough.

Hence my (repeated) advice to the OP: pay up, and then complain strongly that the fact Gatwick is outside the boundary is simply not clear enough to passengers unfamiliar with the system.

 

[bb21]

As for Oyster being used to Gatwick, how will that work, what fare will be charged, gat ex, southern, tl only? Will it be a £17.00 hit from Vic any permitted, or a £5.10. Croydon to Gatwick charge. And what about those that want to go to Horley, Redhill, Merstham??? If Gatwick accepts them, why not these stations.
'well i used my oyster last week to Gatwick, and this is closer.'
And then if Gatwick, why not Luton, Southend, Biggin Hill.......

Charge them Gat Ex fares.

 

[najaB]

But, when plenty of people repeatedly turn up at GTW in no doubt (mistakenly) that they can use their Oyster or contactless, clearly the information that Oyster/CPC is only valid as far as Coulsdon South is not advertised clearly enough.

If people are doing it repeatedly, then it can hardly be the fault of the TOC or TfL. The first time I can understand, but the second time...

Being serious, the real test isn't the absolute number of people who find themselves in this situation but rather the percentage of the total.

 

[Via Bank]

If people are doing it repeatedly, then it can hardly be the fault of the TOC or TfL. The first time I can understand, but the second time…

To clarify, I don't mean the same people doing it more than once (since they would've been caught first time and hopefully not do it again): I mean a steady stream of people getting caught because they didn't realise it wasn't valid.

Oyster has been valid on National Rail routes within the zones for over five years, so there has been plenty of time to identify this problem and take steps to remedy it.

Being serious, the real test isn't the absolute number of people who find themselves in this situation but rather the percentage of the total.

I agree, and I would be very interested to read exactly how many PFs/prosecutions resulted from people attempting to reach Gatwick, Redhill or Brighton by Oyster or Contactless.

Quite how one would obtain this information I don't know. I suppose DfT might hold the information, but don't hold your breath.

 

[bb21]

Hence my (repeated) advice to the OP: pay up, and then complain strongly that the fact Gatwick is outside the boundary is simply not clear enough to passengers unfamiliar with the system.

I cannot endorse this strategy. I am not confident at all it will get you anywhere. As I said before, if you have some recommendations for TfL then do it as such, not as a complaint.

By your logic because Oxford Airport is now called London Oxford Airport, someone unfamiliar with the system should be allowed to get away with trying to pay with Oyster / Contactless at Oxford. I cannot see reasoning along such lines being successful. If you make an incorrect assumption, there are consequences, some being more expensive than others. That's life. You learn from these mistakes and make sure you don't do it again. Trying to pin the blame on someone else because your hands are not being held step by step is hardly going to be at all helpful. The overwhelming majority of people do not have a problem with understanding the validity area of Oyster / Contactless, including many who have no knowledge of the system, so I am not convinced by your argument whatsoever.

At the end of the day, Contactless is not cash, nor is its acceptance universal like regular credit and debit cards, so I am quite surprised that your default position is one of assuming acceptance until else rather than assuming non-acceptance until you find affirmation.

 

[Spurs]

What? Are you saying this is a deliberate conspiracy by the TOCs? There was nothing to stop the OP going to a member of staff and asking the question. Is it OK to use my contactless bank card on the barrier to go to Gatwick?

People need to take responsibility for their own actions.

I'm saying that if the TOCs actually stood to lose the fare if people got the rules wrong, they'd make it a lot clearer. In a good transport system, there shouldn't be a need for people to ask staff about things like this: it's obviously inefficient and often mistakes will be made. Would it not be possible to put up notices saying "Please note Oyster and Contactless Cards are NOT valid for travel to Gatwick Airport"? My question is why they don't, and why they are given an incentive not to inform passengers of the rules.

 

[najaB]

Would it not be possible to put up notices saying "Please note Oyster and Contactless Cards are NOT valid for travel to Gatwick Airport"? My question is why they don't, and why they are given an incentive not to inform passengers of the rules.

And the thread goes into another loop.

 

[island]

Why Gatwick Airport and not any of the other thousands of stations at which Oyster and Contactless are not valid?