The way some passengers who have made mistakes are treated

[bravot]

Maybe it's necessary to go over to national enforcement teams - similar to how London Buses revenue teams work. Would also kick the TOCs up the bum and get them to sort out their ticketing as they would be getting penalised for each incident...

 

[Flamingo]

Maybe it's necessary to go over to national enforcement teams - similar to how London Buses revenue teams work. Would also kick the TOCs up the bum and get them to sort out their ticketing as they would be getting penalised for each incident...

How do you manage to work out that TOC's would be penalised?

 

[bravot]

How do you manage to work out that TOC's would be penalised?

Because depending on the type of offence they would be apportioned some element of blame.

 

[yorkie]

Please use the thread Comparison of offences for a discussion comparing railway ticketing offences with other offences such as motoring offences.

Our forum rules do ask that "subsequent posts should remain relevant to the original topic", yes threads drift a bit, but if someone says something on a different topic, and you wish to discuss that topic, please click the "New thread" button in the relevant forum, provide a quote & link to what you're responding to, and make a new thread about it. That only takes you a few seconds, but It took me 20 minutes to split this thread

Go on then tell us who a fare dodger is or what they look like? :roll:

You can't tell just by looking at them, but Flamingo can suss them out.

From a previous thread:

Body language is strange. After a few years doing it, I'll pick out passengers who don"t have tickets while just walking through the carriage after dispatching the train without having asked to see any tickets. It won't be all of them, but certain people will just (for some reason) set the "spidy senses" tingling. It's rare that it's wrong. Maybe I can just smell the fear!

 

[Flamingo]

Because depending on the type of offence they would be apportioned some element of blame.

Again, why?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Please use the thread Comparison of offences for a discussion comparing railway ticketing offences with other offences such as motoring offences.

Our forum rules do ask that "subsequent posts should remain relevant to the original topic", yes threads drift a bit, but if someone says something on a different topic, and you wish to discuss that topic, please click the "New thread" button in the relevant forum, provide a quote & link to what you're responding to, and make a new thread about it. That only takes you a few seconds, but It took me 20 minutes to split this thread

You can't tell just by looking at them, but Flamingo can suss them out.

From a previous thread:

I'm good! What can I say?

 

[LowLevel]

You rarely hear of things going in the customer's favour they are more inclined to shout about it if they feel aggrieved.

For what it's worth I know I can come across as somewhat aggressive on here but that's because I use the anonymity of the internet to vent my inner frustrations.

In practice I would say I use my discretion far more often than not and many of my colleagues are the same. A few see themselves as there to lay down the law but they're the minority - that from a depot who have a reputation for being very visible and diligent about revenue duties.

Therefore I'd say I certainly treat someone who has made a reasonable error fairly - I even, shock horror, endorse tickets with my details so colleagues know what I've said.

 

[Deerfold]

Because depending on the type of offence they would be apportioned some element of blame.

I think you're going to have to provide a few more details of how your scheme would work for us to understand what you're proposing.

 

[Clip]

Personally I'm sick and tired of reading on these forums worried messages from ordinary members of the public who have VERY obviously to any normal, reasonable person simply made a simple mistake in their purchase or non-purchase of ticket, yet who have been shown zero discretion or help from the employees of the various TOCs, who seem to instead just rub their hands and screw them for every penny.

Personally, me and my colleagues across the nation from barrier staff to guards to RPIS are sick and tired of people not purchasing their ticket or indeed the correct ticket before they travell and then use every excuse in the book as to why they dont have them.

Personally I am sick and tired of seeing countless threads on here descend into 'what if' arguments by people on here either havent got a clue or think they can find an out for those people who find themselves in the mire.


We could fix all ticketing woes by barriers at all stations and working TVMs/offices but you wont pay for it will you.

It is not a hard concept to follow as I am sure you will understand- Buy a ticket before you travel(usual caveats apply)


If that is too difficult for you or anyone else then I would suggest rail travel isnt for you.

 

[CC 72100]

We could fix all ticketing woes by barriers at all stations

How dare you make such a preposterous suggestion! Everybody knows that barriers are dehumanising and the worst thing that ever happened to the rail industry! All stations should be open access to all and sundry, because people are honest and would not take advantage of no physical barriers whatsoever!

(Tongue firmly in cheek - I entirely agree with your whole post. The way barriers are spoken about on by some here you'd think they were some kind of torture device, but I challenge people to come up with alternative ways of doing revenue protection on metro style services where staff visibility can be low.)

 

[Flamingo]

There are three alternatives to barriers -
1. have an honesty box at each station,
2. Have an army of RPI's and ATE's with zero tolerance and punitive penalties to discourage fare evasion
3. Cover the cost of running the railway from tax, as there will be a large drop in takings.

 

[Deerfold]

We could fix all ticketing woes by barriers at all stations and working TVMs/offices but you wont pay for it will you.

Well, TOCs won't pay for it.

It won't fix the woes of those who have valid tickets but are not allowed access to the train by staff who won't check restrictions or validity (but "know" they're not valid).

 

[Flamingo]

Well, TOCs won't pay for it.

It won't fix the woes of those who have valid tickets but are not allowed access to the train by staff who won't check restrictions or validity (but "know" they're not valid).

Yes, because that happens thousands of times every day :roll:. You only have to look at the hundreds of threads started on here every week complaining about this!

 

[Bletchleyite]

(Tongue firmly in cheek - I entirely agree with your whole post. The way barriers are spoken about on by some here you'd think they were some kind of torture device, but I challenge people to come up with alternative ways of doing revenue protection on metro style services where staff visibility can be low.)

As a passenger I have grown to like barriers, because they prevent me from accidentally fare-dodging (i.e. forgetting my ticket). I am all for the idea. Though it would require a change in the law to allow them to be remotely supervised in a completely unstaffed station, AIUI.

Having the bogs inside of them (if there isn't a charge) seems to help prevent vandalism, too.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

2. Have an army of RPI's and ATE's with zero tolerance and punitive penalties to discourage fare evasion

The Swiss have gone this way, notably. But they seem to be able to provide a ticket machine at every station, however small, and it works as well. Perhaps less of a vandalism/theft issue than some parts of the UK though - it is a very honest and safe country as a whole.

But I am starting to think we should go this way - provide fully-featured TVMs at every station, and make the rule absolute - you MUST buy before travel, no ifs, no buts, no exceptions. If the TVM is broken you MUST report this before travel and get a reference number (this is how Metrolink do it I believe).

For very rural or quiet lines bringing the Paytrain concept back might be the way to go (basically making it clear that on these trains it is, unless you are prevented from doing so by barriers, ALWAYS acceptable to pay on board), or even on-board TVMs like used in parts of Germany. You could then go the way of Switzerland and Germany by making it very obvious on the train itself, PIS etc when there is an exception.

CH: Penalty Fare trains (Selbstkontrolle), which is most of them now, are indicated by this logo by each door:
http://www.blwe.ch/download.php?file_id=434&file_version=1

DE: you get this:
http://blog.erstsemester2009.uni-oldenburg.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/04112009814-666x500.jpg

Neil

 

[Agent_c]

You rarely hear of things going in the customer's favour they are more inclined to shout about it if they feel aggrieved.

For what it's worth I know I can come across as somewhat aggressive on here but that's because I use the anonymity of the internet to vent my inner frustrations.

In practice I would say I use my discretion far more often than not and many of my colleagues are the same. A few see themselves as there to lay down the law but they're the minority - that from a depot who have a reputation for being very visible and diligent about revenue duties.

Therefore I'd say I certainly treat someone who has made a reasonable error fairly - I even, shock horror, endorse tickets with my details so colleagues know what I've said.

If however we look at the opposite - the current posts from the outraged guy who was in first class with ample warnings that he shouldn't be there refused to leave, was given the option to pay the excess, and then refused to pay it... I dunno how much more reasonable things could be in that situation...

 

[Amy Worrall]

Personally I'm sick and tired of reading on these forums worried messages from ordinary members of the public who have VERY obviously to any normal, reasonable person simply made a simple mistake in their purchase or non-purchase of ticket, yet who have been shown zero discretion or help from the employees of the various TOCs, who seem to instead just rub their hands and screw them for every penny.

I agree. I have a story from my days of travelling with a 16-25 railcard (now, alas, in the past!). I had bought a railcard return ticket from Coventry to Manchester from the machine at Coventry (might have been Canley, can't remember), and travelled changing at Birmingham. Whilst on the first leg of the journey, I realised my railcard had expired last month (I hadn't travelled on trains at all since it had expired). I wasn't ticket checked on the train, and as soon as I got to Birmingham I went to the fares to pay desk (inside the barriers) and asked to renew my railcard. I expected I might be asked to pay the full fare for a Coventry to Birmingham journey too (about £3), and would have been fine with that.

The sod behind the desk asked to see my ticket, then tore it in half. He told me I was not permitted to leave the station, neither on foot nor on a train, until I had bought an anytime return ticket for my entire journey. I tried arguing with him (for a long time) to no avail.

In the end I went out of the station (I knew full well that you could use the lifts to get past the ticket barriers without being checked — I would never do so in order to skive though!), renewed the railcard at the information desk outside, bought a new railcard ticket, and walked back through the barriers. But the bad taste has never left my mouth. I made a small mistake, tried to fix it, and had to pay a bunch more than if I hadn't been honest (i.e. had just gone via the lifts and renewed my railcard outside).

What is worse, is that whilst I was arguing with the guy inside the barrier, a girl managed to talk her way through the gateline saying she had lost her ticket. The person on the gate, after a few questions, said "Oh all right then" and let her through. I've no idea whether she was genuine or not, but the fact that she got leeway and I didn't really smarts.

I did complain to the guy's supervisor while I was there, and he told me "I can't overrule my subordinates, or it will lead to people not respecting their authority". I wrote a complaint letter to London Midland afterwards and got nowhere. I didn't take things any further, partly because I was the developer of London Midland's iPhone app at the time, and didn't want to cause any problems for my employer.

In my mind, this is a classic case where discretion should be shown. I obviously wasn't trying to skive a fare, since I'd gone to him voluntarily, inside the gateline, on my first break of journey, and offered to pay for a new railcard there and then. It's made me much less inclined to own up to a mistake in the future.

Anyhow, glad to get that off my chest.

 

[talltim]

I'd like to add my name to those who have only ever been shown discretion (actually, let off) I'm a commuter, so pretty much always use a season ticket. Over the last ten years I think I've forgotten my ticket a couple of times and tried to use it past its validity (without realising) a couple of times too. Except one time when the guard* didn't notice the expiration either and I only realise the next day, I've always asked for a return ticket when they have come round, explaining that I'd only just realised my mistake and had it sold with no issue at all. This is on XC and EMT (possibly VXC and MML).
I did once have some hassle when commuting to school with a season. I had forgotten it and got stopped by a BR Thameslink block exiting the station on my way home. As I lived near the station I gave them my name and address, went home and got it and showed it to them and they cancelled whatever penalty they had prepared for me.

*insert appropriate ticket checking official title

 

[Deerfold]

Yes, because that happens thousands of times every day :roll:. You only have to look at the hundreds of threads started on here every week complaining about this!

Clip claimed it would fix "all ticketing woes". I didn't realise there had to be thousands of occurances of people being denied access to a train they've a valid ticket for or overcharged for it to be important.

 

[LateThanNever]

I have a good deal of sympathy with the general gist of your argument.

I am of the personal belief that section 18 of the Railway Byelaws should be abolished. Strict liability may be appropriate where it is considered necessary for public safety, such as most motoring offences or food hygiene matters. In these circumstances, persons subject to such laws are expected to have undertaken education and certification in the relevant area - such as a driving course and passing a driving test, or a food safety course and passing a food safety certificate.

Yet we do not expect everyone who travels by train to read up on the (quite complicated) ticketing regulations before they are allowed to board. Yes, there are a goodly number of fare dodgers around, but the provisions of RoRA are enough to deal with the doughnutters, short farers and toilet hiders. And if someone claims to have made a "mistake" three times in a row during a week, CCTV should be adequate to provide evidence of intent. And for those chavs and lowlifes who turn violent when challenged, there's plenty of non-railway related criminal law to deal with them properly (despite the fact that magistrates habitually just slap them on the wrist and tell them not to be a naughty boy/girl again).

And what happens when the booking office clerk makes a mistake? Again, the passenger is criminally responsible. This is not to say that they are not human and should be immune to mistakes, but why should the passenger be treated so disproportionately?

We should not be treating honest people as if they were criminal fare-dodgers just because there are some dishonest people who are actually fare-dodgers, this is, in my opinion, immoral.

A very good point. It is not generally understood by passengers that there can be strict liability in rail fares but, as you so significantly point out there is no training course prior to travelling by train - even minors do it. And the legality of putting the legal onus of ensuring validity on to the passenger, when they have no training, but it is the very profession of rail staff, defies logic.

There is a subtle but significant difference in legal procedure between England and Scotland which explains this

Employment and transport are the only lot of laws that are the same in England and Scotland. As the number of road traffic offences doesn't seem to be grossly disproportionate between the two but the rail fare prosecutions do, it seems reasonable to deduce that reform is required. Unless of course fare dodging is presumed not to be in the Scottish character...

Personally, me and my colleagues across the nation from barrier staff to guards to RPIS are sick and tired of people not purchasing their ticket or indeed the correct ticket before they travell and then use every excuse in the book as to why they dont have them.

We could fix all ticketing woes by barriers at all stations and working TVMs/offices but you wont pay for it will you.

It is not a hard concept to follow as I am sure you will understand- Buy a ticket before you travel(usual caveats apply)


If that is too difficult for you or anyone else then I would suggest rail travel isnt for you.

To take the last point first. Rail travel cannot really be denied to anyone - after all the majority of people contribute to its funding through taxes but never use it. So it is not up to taxpayers to pay - we do already. It is up to TOC's, whose companies bid lots of money to the government to make a profit for themselves out of better organising the rail system.
You may indeed be tired of people not paying - but I have been on trains where I've found it impossible to pay anyone at all!
Reckless and inconsistent enforcement by the railway leads to reckless and inconsistent passenger behaviour.

If the railway was consistent and coherent there would be no need to rely on strict liability to excuse any of the railway's own omissions, because there would be a reasonable prospect of construing intention from the passenger.
Should be pretty simple really. Just means that every opportunity to travel must also always be made an easy opportunity to pay. So that probably means both more staff and more automation.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Looks to me as if more than 100 fare dodgers a day on just one small patch of railway is worth a lot more effort rather than a lot less.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/new...s-caught-three-8510209#ICID=sharebar_facebook

 

[Deerfold]

Looks to me as if more than 100 fare dodgers a day on just one small patch of railway is worth a lot more effort rather than a lot less.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/new...s-caught-three-8510209#ICID=sharebar_facebook

But only 3 a day prosecuted. Wonder how staff costs for 5 days compares with £1000 from 'penalty fines'.

 

[Flamingo]

Clip claimed it would fix "all ticketing woes". I didn't realise there had to be thousands of occurances of people being denied access to a train they've a valid ticket for or overcharged for it to be important.

I didn't realise isolated incidents which are a minuscule proportion of the overall journeys made each year are a reason to condemn the whole system as unfit for purpose...

 

[Fare-Cop]

But only 3 a day prosecuted. Wonder how staff costs for 5 days compares with £1000 from 'penalty fines'.

Your response seems to assume that it is likely that the RP staff concerned report for prosecution every person that they speak to, whereas the reality is that they may actually collect revenue, which may be both fares & penalty fares, from many more people than are reported.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But only 3 a day prosecuted. Wonder how staff costs for 5 days compares with £1000 from 'penalty fines'.

522 * £20 = £10,440. I expect that compares very favourably to the cost of the staff.

About time the entire Cross City was barriered?

Neil

 

[CC 72100]

About time the entire Cross City was barriered?

Neil

I did think that during my recent travels on the line, I did think that fare evasion must be pretty high with ticket checks infrequent due to how close the stops were.

 

[PauloDavesi]

I can't remember the last time there was a ticket check when using the cross city line, in contrast to the Stratford to Stourbridge service, where tickets were checked before and after the train passed through Moor St/Snow Hill.

I wonder how much revenue LM are losing by not checking tickets at New Street, where at least two of the three entrances to the platforms are left unmanned.
Perhaps if the industry was not subsidised by the tax payer it would have to become much more efficient and customer focused.

 

[Flamingo]

I can't remember the last time there was a ticket check when using the cross city line, in contrast to the Stratford to Stourbridge service, where tickets were checked before and after the train passed through Moor St/Snow Hill.

I wonder how much revenue LM are losing by not checking tickets at New Street, where at least two of the three entrances to the platforms are left unmanned.
Perhaps if the industry was not subsidised by the tax payer it would have to become much more efficient and customer focused.

Well, the tone of many posters on this forum (but not all, I hasten to add) is that by pursueing revenue, somehow TOC's are acting to the detriment of their "customers". It is the taxpayer subsidy that to a certain extent allows TOC's to not take a zero-tolerance approach in all circumstances, but the legislation is in place (put their by Parliment, who hold the responsibility for the public purse) to allow for a total clampdown. Although this could be efficient, would it be customer focused?

 

[PauloDavesi]

A consistent policy throughout the industry would be to the benefit of all involved, however that does require the industry, and it's operatives, to ensure the correct tickets are available at all times, and if that is not the case to treat the customers properly, not as criminals.

As a fare paying customer & a tax payer, I find it quite frustrating that the industry does not do all it can to collect revenues, preferring to rely on subsidies from the tax payer. If that subsidy was removed the industry would have to deal with the problem or face closures.

 

[Flamingo]

Fair enough, zero tolerance it is;
1. Everybody who gets on from a station where they could have purchased a ticket before boarding to be penalty-fared or a bylaw 18 prosecution. At the least, sold an Anytime single.
2. Everybody who fails to show a valid railcard given a PF or otherwise treated as if they have no ticket (see above)
3. All Advance ticket holders to be charged a new ticket if on the wrong train.

There are lots of other things, but that't the big three to be going on with...

 

[bb21]

Speaking of New Street barriers, the last couple of times I passed the place, from the new concourse, only the one by the higher numbered platforms was staffed, with the one by the lower numbered platforms left completely empty.

"What is the point?" I hear you ask. I, too, was left wondering.

 

[swj99]

I often wonder if the wrong quesion is being asked with regard to what's referred to as 'revenue protection'.
When I hear the question, 'Did this person evade their fare ?' I think it raises another quite valid question, which is, 'Did the railway allow this person onto a train when they either didn't have a ticket, or the correct ticket ?' And if the answer to that question is yes it did, then I can understand why people object to being treated as if they have tried to get one over on the railway company, when this is quite clearly not always the case. Train operating companies have a responsibility to put themselves into a position where they are able to sell tickets. It is when they fail to do this, and then attempt to blame passengers, that they lose any sympathy they might otherwise have gained. The crazy thing is, the process could be so easy. Simply buy ticket, get on train, arrive at destination, no hassle for passenger or train company. But when the process becomes ridiculoulsy complicated, as highlighted in experiences described by Alex C, the whole thing becomes the farce we're now discussing.

was told I was lying................ TVM not working.
........told me I should have bought a return to Portchester and then excessed it.

..........asked him to excess it for me - he said he couldn't do it..........missed my train............. not sure if I should be buying the wrong ticket from the TVM or the right ticket from the guard......
..........the guard came round and told me the tickets weren't valid..........he admitted he was wrong and apologised.........

Another problem is that when TOCs target the wrong people, ie those who are not 'fare dodgers' then they tie themselves or their legal departments up in knots dealing with defended prosecutions, civil claims, and complaints against them.

The argument that says people have to pay the correct fare to travel on a train is just as valid as the one saying train companies must put themselves in a position where they can sell tickets. To me, the sob story from TOCs about how they need to save money by having less ticket offices, or reducing the opening hours of those ticket offices is just a cop out, and a cheap excuse. If they really wanted to increase revenue and sell a ticket to every person who travelled on the train, I honestly believe they would get out there and do just that. If they have to spend money to achieve this, so be it. I think it's also fair to say if they can afford to employ staff to try to catch people who haven't got a ticket, they can afford to pay people to sell tickets. Until then, I'm sure we'll just keep seeing more threads like this, more people with less and less respect for the railway companies, and more stories of people not paying for tickets they would have willingly bought if a decent opportunity had existed.