The damage done by overzealous revenue protection activities

[Bletchleyite]

No, it isn't. But if the costs of employing more ticketing staff or installing more TVM are higher than the additional revenue that will be generated it just doesn't make business sense to do anything about it (the only thing I can think of is to issue PTT's and allow payment at the other end.

Cheap PERTIS machines would seem to be a good solution for a number of stations. Less susceptible to vandalism, and if they are vandalised cheaper to replace/repair.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A proper, DfT authorised, penalty fare scheme requires every station to have any combination of a ticket office / TVM / Permit to Travel machine. Plus visible signage that the passenger / customer must walk past before boarding the their train.

Quite right, too.

Northern choose not to invest in the necessary pre-requisites for a proper penalty fare scheme and have been allowed (encouraged?) by DfT to go down their alternative route. It's easy to see why - it's cheaper and easier to operate.

And I have a massive problem with this.

 

[Envy123]

Unless your journey allows you to get a Gold Card, then there isn't much benefit in getting an annual.

Really?

I plan to commute from [wherever I will end up] to London Terminals plus a tube journey within Zone 1 or 2, most likely 3 days a week. Plus a restaurant trip to either Golders Green or Kensington, once a week.

It would be awesome if buying tickets on the day would be cheaper than an annual, as annual prices are a bit on the crazy side.

Too bad ITSO is in its infancy and not as convenient as Oyster.

 

[radamfi]

In a number of countries now, it is possible to buy a ticket on your phone and not have to print it out or collect it. And it has been the case for a number of years now. Not just for advance booking. For walk on fares as well. That's a low cost, quick solution to the Northern ticketing farce that requires minimum infrastructure. I can only assume Northern/DfT want to cut overcrowding by making ticket buying as difficult as possible. They don't want extra passengers generated by easy ticketing.

 

[infobleep]

TBH.

I think the damage done is very little. People who get fined normally pay up next time. and if they dont and decide not to travel in case they might get fined for not buying a ticket. Does the railway want them anyway.
They are called the 'pay when challenged' brigade. Some even try to pay with high value notes just in the hope the conductor will let em off. Many buy singles even though they are commuting and will be coming back in the hope they will get away with it on their way home.

Some learn quickly, others not.

If you every want to see this in action. Travel on the 05.58 Southern service from Gatwick to Southampton. You will see this from Three Bridges and inbetween stations up to Billingshurst. There is a group of people traveling on this train (and others) who we guess work in a factory paying min wage.
Some will have weekly passes,
Some will have key cards
Some will pay when challenged
Some will pay when challenged with large notes (£20's and £50's)
Those who pay when challenged will all buy singles.
Some will try and avoid you.

Some forget that we staff have the ability to talk. So when one was noted on Monday traveling on a out of date key card this was discussed in the mess room. So the punter was checked every day and charged the correct fare, that by Friday he was boarding the train and coming straight up and buying. (still only a single tho').

I've said to some that they are risking it. Could they really afford to loose £1500 in fines?

But I digress.

I think the temptation not to pay is probably greater at unmanned stations and/or stations without barriers.

 

[Tracky]

What annoys me is the absolute majority of hard working and struggling low paid people do the right thing even if it is a struggle.

The vast majority of the people who try it on, don't buy at the first op, avoid and evade are doing so because they think they are being clever and they don't see it as wrong.

 

[Steveoh]

Just to clarify I'm am also for passengers paying their way but the railway should work around the passenger not the other way around. Take this point:

No, it isn't. But if the costs of employing more ticketing staff or installing more TVM are higher than the additional revenue that will be generated it just doesn't make business sense to do anything about it (the only thing I can think of is to issue PTT's and allow payment at the other end.

Try this with your manager, "I'm sorry I'm late for work I had to queue up at the ticket office to buy a ticket whilst my train was at the platform". People get punctures, buses are late, car parks are full. Buying a ticket should be quick and easy and fit for purpose in this digital age, it shouldn't be an impediment to travel. There should also NOT be an excuse that a passenger didn't buy a ticket. Effectively the argument seems to be because some people cheat the system you're a cheat unless you can prove otherwise. The system is saying we don't have the resources to employ more ticketing staff so passenger all the onus is on you. The railways should be a public service and behave in that way.

 

[najaB]

The railways should be a public service and behave in that way.

Tax rise anyone?

 

[infobleep]

Tax rise anyone?

We have some of the lowest taxes In Europe. Clearly the government don't want tax rises but personally l think there a good reason, it wouldn't bother me.

 

[Steveoh]

Tax rise anyone?

What do you think the purpose of the railway is? I mean a public service in the sense that the public use the railway, hence public transport. It's a tool to get you from A to B, private, nationalised, franchised it makes no difference. However the railways should be there for the benefit of the user. Are the conditions of carriage fit for this day and age? I'm not sure they are, hence this thread. Payment for journeys should be easy, it is not.

 

[plannerman]

I think that railways in this country are disproportionately difficult to use, in terms of ticket types, ensuring you catch the right train etc.
As an example, tomorrow I travel for a meeting in Sweden. My journey from the airport will involve two separate trains, with a change in central Stockholm. I have no real knowledge of the Swedish rail network, and yet I am confident that a helpful clerk will sell me exactly the ticket I need, and that I won't fall into any kind of ticketing 'trap'.

When Swedish colleagues come to our office in Chester, we always pick them up at the airport because our rail network is seen as too complicated for visitors to navigate, particularly in terms of ticketing. And I suspect there probably isn't a lot of difference between the train and taxi fare anyway, especially if two or three people are travelling together.

 

[Llanigraham]

No. People are customers. They deserve to be treated much better than this.

So you agree that they should be allowed to ignore the Law?

Why doesn't that surprise me!!

The customer is required to purchase a ticket before they travel, if there are facilities to do so. If they can't be bothered to plan well enough in advance to do that they then have to accept the consequences.

Note, I do not work for a TOC!

 

[najaB]

When Swedish colleagues come to our office in Chester, we always pick them up at the airport because our rail network is seen as too complicated for visitors to navigate, particularly in terms of ticketing.

It is incredibly simple if you are buying Anytime, any permitted route tickets. What it isn't is cheap.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What do you think the purpose of the railway is? I mean a public service in the sense that the public use the railway, hence public transport. It's a tool to get you from A to B, private, nationalised, franchised it makes no difference.

Not a fan of analogies, but do you expect British Airways (or any other airline) to be run as a 'public service' as well?

 

[Clip]

So you agree that they should be allowed to ignore the Law?

Why doesn't that surprise me!!

The customer is required to purchase a ticket before they travel, if there are facilities to do so. If they can't be bothered to plan well enough in advance to do that they then have to accept the consequences.

Note, I do not work for a TOC!

Wasting your time. There must be at least 4 or 5 active threads similar to this. Just leave them to it.

 

[pemma]

I would perceive that FCC got away with a lot due to its genuine monopoly, whereas in northern land there are trams, buses and car parks as an alternative.

I'm not sure I agree with that.

In PTE areas maybe buses are an option but outside buses which replicate rail routes are usually slow and infrequent so can't be used for commuting.

Very few cities have trams.

Also apparently newly built workplaces can't have 1 car parking space per employee due to some rule they have to rely on something like 50% of employees not coming in their own car.

 

[Clip]

Cheap PERTIS machines would seem to be a good solution for a number of stations. Less susceptible to vandalism, and if they are vandalised cheaper to replace/repair.
.

Rubbish - they get vandalised just for the fun of it and quite often too. Even when there isn't more than probably 50p in it and that's if they go for the cash box.

 

[Tetchytyke]

So you agree that they should be allowed to ignore the Law?

No, I'm saying the law is an ass.

 

[najaB]

Rubbish - they get vandalised just for the fun of it and quite often too. Even when there isn't more than probably 50p in it and that's if they go for the cash box.

I'm pretty sure that if there is sufficient will it's possible to make them either resistant to vandals, or very cheap to repair/replace. If an area is so rough that upkeep is excessively expensive then you're no worse of than we are today.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Rubbish - they get vandalised just for the fun of it and quite often too. Even when there isn't more than probably 50p in it and that's if they go for the cash box.

Car parks seem to cope.

 

[MichaelAMW]

So you agree that they should be allowed to ignore the Law?

Why doesn't that surprise me!!

The customer is required to purchase a ticket before they travel, if there are facilities to do so. If they can't be bothered to plan well enough in advance to do that they then have to accept the consequences.

Note, I do not work for a TOC!

Just to be clear, since you have in effect broadened the scope of this thread with that comment, you don't believe there should be any limit to how long a passenger has to wait to use those facilities if they are inadequate? This thread is about the difficulty of buying a ticket, not whether one ought to be bought. To use a Tesco analogy, everyone's favourite, by which I actually mean not to use a Tesco analogy, if you queue for 15 mins at the checkout you will be the same 15 minutes late but at a station you could end up very much later. In *that* case, buying on the train or at destination would seem to be a way of having at least a bit of customer focus. This is why being pulled out of a queue at an excess fares windows *might* be unreasonable treatment, depending in circumstances at the origin station.

 

[crehld]

Rubbish - they get vandalised just for the fun of it and quite often too. Even when there isn't more than probably 50p in it and that's if they go for the cash box.

This excuse comes up a lot and is unsustainable (dare I say "rubbish" even). It sounds like the company line from an industry that lacks drive, innovation and imagination (I'm sure this isn't the image the railway industry wants to convey, but it does come across that way).

I used to live in Portsmouth where my local station was Fratton - not the nicest area of town! If I recall correctly there were two TVMs outside the station accessible all hours and I'm sure one took cash. I have no doubt they were the target of vandalism (but then so were traffic lights, road signs, parked cars, shop fronts... the list goes on) but they were nevertheless always operational when I had cause to use them (very often). Those machines have been in situ for at least eight years, and SWT clearly haven't felt the need to remove them because of this so-called rampant vandalism. If it can be done there why not elsewhere?

I'm sure with a bit of imagination (and no doubt money) TOCs could invest in vandal proofing their equipment if that is the actual reason for holding back on this.

You, and the railway industry at large, seem to object to passengers finding excuses for not having a ticket. In fact I and many other passengers object to this too. So why not remove these excuses peddled by the fare evaders by providing adequate ticket issuing facilities across the board? If it simply cannot be done (because the industry has no money or because the industry suffers a chronic lack of drive) then why on earth is it investing in a penalty scheme which assumes universal availability of ticket issuing facilities?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So you agree that they should be allowed to ignore the Law?

Why doesn't that surprise me!!

The customer is required to purchase a ticket before they travel, if there are facilities to do so. If they can't be bothered to plan well enough in advance to do that they then have to accept the consequences.

Note, I do not work for a TOC!

No one is suggesting people go out and break the law. Some people have suggested the law is unjust. Others have suggested TOCs should do more to facilitate and encourage legitimate travel by improving ticketing facilities.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just to be clear, since you have in effect broadened the scope of this thread with that comment, you don't believe there should be any limit to how long a passenger has to wait to use those facilities if they are inadequate? This thread is about the difficulty of buying a ticket, not whether one ought to be bought. To use a Tesco analogy, everyone's favourite, by which I actually mean not to use a Tesco analogy, if you queue for 15 mins at the checkout you will be the same 15 minutes late but at a station you could end up very much later. In *that* case, buying on the train or at destination would seem to be a way of having at least a bit of customer focus. This is why being pulled out of a queue at an excess fares windows *might* be unreasonable treatment, depending in circumstances at the origin station.

The easy solution to that again exists in a PERTIS machine, and turning it on if the ticket office queue is excessive.

 

[Mojo]

The issue that I see, is that as part of the framework for charging Penalty fares, there are a number of safeguards.

Firstly, Tocs have to draft up a Penalty fares scheme and present it to the DfT.
These must be approved by the DfT and they are publicly available under FoI.
These documents include details about staff training, station facilities, signage and other warnings to customers, appeals, who will charge Penalty fares, arrangements for failures of equipment and excess queueing, arrangements for customers who have forgotten their season ticket, and so on.
The value of a Penalty fare is set by the Secretary of State.

Northern Rail are charging more than the majority of Penalty fares are, yet these safeguards rarely apply with their "Penalty fake" system.
A system and a framework already exists for charging customers who do not buy beforehand, where they should do.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Fair point.



Is that a recent change, just a LM thing, or is it a fare incorrectly not marked as unidirectional? I have never been sold one when I have requested one in the past at a ticket office - I've always been told Boundary Zones are only an origin.

Tickets to BZ6 only became available a couple of years ago

 

[158801]

So, I board a train at a station with only one ticket window.

I arrive at the station 15 minutes early. There are three people in front of me - 2 of whom want advance purchase tickets for travel in several weeks time.

After waiting for 14 minutes I have still not been served so I have a choice. Break the law and catch the train I intended with no ticket or abide by law, waiting in the queue and catch the train 60 minutes later.

I decide to take a chance. The guard appears and I ask for a ticket. They could either follow the rules and issue an undiscounted any time ticket or provide good "customer service " and sell me my off peak day return.

How does the guard know I was waiting so long ? Any one can say " there was a queue mate".

It's a no win situation for the guard.

 

[crehld]

So, I board a train at a station with only one ticket window.

I arrive at the station 15 minutes early. There are three people in front of me - 2 of whom want advance purchase tickets for travel in several weeks time.

After waiting for 14 minutes I have still not been served so I have a choice. Break the law and catch the train I intended with no ticket or abide by law, waiting in the queue and catch the train 60 minutes later.

I decide to take a chance. The guard appears and I ask for a ticket. They could either follow the rules and issue an undiscounted any time ticket or provide good "customer service " and sell me my off peak day return.

How does the guard know I was waiting so long ? Any one can say " there was a queue mate".

It's a no win situation for the guard.

Indeed it is. Which is why investing in station facilities becomes ever more important.

 

[island]

Fair point.



Is that a recent change, just a LM thing, or is it a fare incorrectly not marked as unidirectional? I have never been sold one when I have requested one in the past at a ticket office - I've always been told Boundary Zones are only an origin.

It's an LM thing. Since at least NFM12 boundary zones have been valid as a destination or origin. I had major problems in 2012 buying tickets to boundary zones from Northampton and ended up applying NRCoC3 because the ticket I wanted wasn't available, so bought a ticket to Watford Junction. The guard was invariably happy to take the difference.

 

[causton]

It is not an LM thing as all of my colleagues frequently sell tickets to and from Boundary Zone 6 because other TOCs cannot read a map and think Hertfordshire is Zone 6

 

[34D]

So you agree that they should be allowed to ignore the Law?

Why doesn't that surprise me!!

The customer is required to purchase a ticket before they travel, if there are facilities to do so. If they can't be bothered to plan well enough in advance to do that they then have to accept the consequences.

Note, I do not work for a TOC!

We don't want rules. We don't want silliness.

Normal people want to turn up at a station in good time, but know that if there is a broken machine or a long queue that they can get on the train (that they have arrived in good time for) and buy a ticket later or, if noone comes around, just leave the station and go, without some gestapo running after them.

On balance I would repeal all of the legislation: no other service industry needs byelaws about people swearing etc, and if there is a dispute over monies it can be heard in the small claims court like any other dispute.

If the TOC's want income they will invest in machines, ITSO systems, etc.

Finally aren't you the guy who's a signaller? Kind of not really fair to say you don't work in the industry if so: either leave it out completely or give an answer that is the whole truth, would be my suggestion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tickets to BZ6 only became available a couple of years ago

Ah, thanks.

 

[clagmonster]

So, I board a train at a station with only one ticket window.

I arrive at the station 15 minutes early. There are three people in front of me - 2 of whom want advance purchase tickets for travel in several weeks time.

After waiting for 14 minutes I have still not been served so I have a choice. Break the law and catch the train I intended with no ticket or abide by law, waiting in the queue and catch the train 60 minutes later.

I decide to take a chance. The guard appears and I ask for a ticket. They could either follow the rules and issue an undiscounted any time ticket or provide good "customer service " and sell me my off peak day return.

How does the guard know I was waiting so long ? Any one can say " there was a queue mate".

It's a no win situation for the guard.

In that position, I would seek out the guard on the platform and ask his permission to board without a ticket. If he says no, then you lose nothing and can go back to the queue, making the train an hour later. If he says yes, you are quite able to board. Doing it this way:
1) removes the breach of the byelaws
2) increases the chance of the discounted ticket being issued, as you have demonstrated a willingness to pay the fare

Of course, in DOO areas this is not an option.