D1009
Established Member
I thought only one side of the story had been presented.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
TPE kicks woman and child off train
- Thread starter 142094
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
[having said I wouldn't post any more on this thread, I should explain that this is purely for clarification]
Now, and only now, that lucyc2014 has come on here to post her own recollations and thoughts on the matter, I felt able to make a contribution myself, and that is welcoming of some first-hand evidence from the event; something which had not been available until now.
Consequently, I want to repeat my gratitude that lucyc2014 has come on here to present her recollections from that day, whether right, wrong, or beyond judgement, so that we can see just a little way into how the reported passenger recalls that incident. With so much damnation of her already on here, I actually find her contribution to be a brave and bold move in the struggle to lessen her anxiety about that event two years ago.
I hope that has made my reason for gratitude to lucyc2014 clearer.
Yes. I read about 20 voices on here from people who were not present at the time and who concluded that the passenger had erred in one of a number of ways (these voices became visible on the first page of this thread). The 'side of the story' which I read made one or two assumptions about the passenger, her circumstances and her interation with the rail staff and I found it to be quite consistent throughout the thread.
Now, and only now, that lucyc2014 has come on here to post her own recollations and thoughts on the matter, I felt able to make a contribution myself, and that is welcoming of some first-hand evidence from the event; something which had not been available until now.
Consequently, I want to repeat my gratitude that lucyc2014 has come on here to present her recollections from that day, whether right, wrong, or beyond judgement, so that we can see just a little way into how the reported passenger recalls that incident. With so much damnation of her already on here, I actually find her contribution to be a brave and bold move in the struggle to lessen her anxiety about that event two years ago.
I hope that has made my reason for gratitude to lucyc2014 clearer.
Last edited:
Geezertronic
Established Member
I found it rather emotive to be honest, hardly something I would take as fact unless I saw an official report containing similar information
Tell you what, Ill kick you off the train at an unmanned station with a child while treating you like a common criminal then conveniently ignore your complaint for 7 days by which time any evidence backing your story up will have been deleted and then lets see if you remain "not emotive".
I think the biggest problem that has been highlighted time after time is just how quickly so many of you would have treated this woman in exactly the same way as the original conductor.
Good on Lucy for coming here and telling her side of the story.
Mailman
Geezertronic
Established Member
And your response is emotive as well. The "evidence" could have proved that the woman was disruptive and/or abusive - we only have her point of view to say she wasn't. And from what others have said, the conductor was within their rights to ask the woman to leave the train. Just because the woman "forgot her railcard" and didn't have enough funds to either pay by cash or card, or didn't have enough credit on her phone to contact someone is irrelevant
Also the fact that this was a woman with a child is irrelevant - I guarantee you that if this was an 18 year old male or a suited businessman then the same emotive responses would not be received.
And isnt it a shame that the guard involved is not on here so we get the WHOLE story and not just the story from the side that felt there was an injustice towards them?
But no, Lets just throw aside all the advice and posts that have been on this forum before about a PASSENGERS responsibility to have the correct ticket for travel - which you can see in abundance in the disputes section - and just go with this passengers story because she had a child.
Yes,lets.:roll:
RJ
Established Member
I agree with you - people in a position of authority don't realise what damage they can do by mishandling a situation. Some Train Operating Companies have this mentality where so long as they can identify something, anything that the passenger did wrong, their staff's actions will be allowed pass with impunity. This has a detrimental effect on some people.
If a ticket inspector ever picked up my property and put it off a train, I'd call the police there and then. Furthermore, I'd bypass their employer's poxy investigations and go through the proper channels to have it dealt with as a crime.
There are ways and means of dealing with fare evasion cases such as the one discussed in this thread. What's wrong with taking down the details to allow the matter to be followed up? Or keeping the train moving and having the train met by the police at the first opportunity? If they can't make it, they can't make it. The inspector can't have felt abused or intimidated - else they would have retreated and sought assistance in the first instance, rather than keeping up the interaction with the passenger.
People in jobs like are often adept in covering themselves. People lie, even if it means landing someone else in it. After all, they have bills to pay and wouldn't want to have their ability to do that compromised over what they see as a deserving fare evader. Their employers are often caught between a rock and a hard place - it's never advisable to take action without solid evidence that malpractice took place. If they do, they leave themselves open to all kinds of problems. The path of least resistance is to brush off for the customer - politely or otherwise. Unlucky for them if the customer challenges this.
I don't condone fare evasion in the slightest, it's the way that it is handled that makes the difference. If someone offers their genuine details, the matter can be followed up by the company. Even if it's not quite as dramatic as throwing someone's things off a train. A common sense approach is always the best option. I agree very much with ANorthernGuard and DaveNewcastle.
Last edited:
You dont know that. You were not there. You are not in full knowledge of the situation as is no one else apart from the woman who has posted this. But please note that that is only her side of the story. We do have to trust her on what she says but as you well know through your experience on the railway that people do embellish their stories, whether to RPIs or the world of social media to get more sympathy so to actually take what is being posted as the gospel truth as some of you are is little more than shocking.
RJ
Established Member
Wise words. Hypothetically then - if I was being barked at, I'd walk away from the situation and get the BTP to deal with it - people can be prosecuted for abusive and threatening behaviour. Putting someone's things off a train in a situation as described here is a truly lamentable and unprofessional action.
Sadly, I've been in mess rooms and heard guards boasting about doing exactly this to a fare evaders, much to the entertainment of some colleagues, but not others. I don't think it's a clever or appropriate thing to do if the sole reason is to get a fare evader off a train.
Last edited:
Statto
Established Member
It annoys me the presumption of guilt by some FMs, before the fact come out. Yes you can forget to take things like Railcards with you, not a Railcard but i forgot to take my Merseytravel Pass one day, & only realised forgot my pass when i was on the train, i got off at the next station & was able to buy a Saveaway, but felt like a right idiot for forgetting my pass.
90019
Established Member
IF that is what happened.
Im well aware that there are guards who do have bad attitudes towards their work - indeed I have some too - but when an incident happens and it gets investigated, albeit after too long it seems here - then you have a 'he said,she said' situation and it is very hard to come to a final conclusion. Especially if the guard in question has an exemplary track record.
Statto - I dont think anyone is presuming guilt on the side of the woman, though the only fact we do know is that she had a railcard discounted ticket but no railcard - its just that we are not in full knowledge of all the facts of the incident. We dont know what stop it was, how far it was from her destination, whether it was unmanned or just unstaffed due to the ticket office being closed,whether there was another service, possibly a Northen one following close behind to which the guard may have allowed her to travel to her destination - which would be their choice,whether or not the woman did kick up a fuss about it even though she claims she didnt.
So how ANYONE of us can form an opinion on whether the guard did right or wrong on the basis of just the womans side of the story is quite wrong.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
We also know some railway staff behave like this too. Cross Country have a couple of, er, notorious guards, shall we say. I'm sure TPE do too. I've certainly had dealings with a couple of exceptionally rude RPIs travelling with them on the west side, in my case also using a F&F railcard (they didn't like the fact that I'd bought a child ticket for my two year old to take advantage of a seat reservation and a cheaper overall fare).
We don't know both sides of the story, of course we don't, we never will. Whilst that doesn't mean we can take the passenger's story as gospel, it also doesn't mean that we can assume the RPI/guard/whoever was saintly.
I am, however, very very surprised that Passenger Focus made a finding that TPE acted reasonably, as TPE seem to have claimed. I did not believe that was within their remit, as they seem to go to great lengths to make it clear that they are not an ombudsman. Certainly when I've used them for complaints they've not come back to me telling me I was wrong, they've simply echoed my complaint to someone at the TOC with a bit more clout than a call centre operative. Maybe the "independent" IPFAS or similar made that finding, although why they would be involved in this complaint (as opposed to dealing with any potential unpaid fares notice) I don't know.
We don't know both sides of the story, of course we don't, we never will. Whilst that doesn't mean we can take the passenger's story as gospel, it also doesn't mean that we can assume the RPI/guard/whoever was saintly.
I am, however, very very surprised that Passenger Focus made a finding that TPE acted reasonably, as TPE seem to have claimed. I did not believe that was within their remit, as they seem to go to great lengths to make it clear that they are not an ombudsman. Certainly when I've used them for complaints they've not come back to me telling me I was wrong, they've simply echoed my complaint to someone at the TOC with a bit more clout than a call centre operative. Maybe the "independent" IPFAS or similar made that finding, although why they would be involved in this complaint (as opposed to dealing with any potential unpaid fares notice) I don't know.
The ladies complaint has been investigated by the operator and appropriate action taken in light of their investigation - they are not going to revisit that.
Passenger Focus in the complainant's words, was unable to help.
There is no physical evidence apart from the statements from complainant and staff member. We are unlikely to be party to those actual statements.
The matter is now, and will continue to be, a case of she said/she said and no more.
As regards the idea that TPE deliberately "lost" the video recording, we all know that at times the TOCs are snowed under with comments and complaints, at least one last year was just sending out substantial amounts in travel vouchers by way of apology, without even investigating the complaint.
It is entirely possible that an email complaint was received by TPE, an auto response sent, and then the actual complaint not even looked at for 7 days or more - too late to retrieve any recording.
I really cannot see the point of any further analysing or discussion as nothing is going to change.
Passenger Focus in the complainant's words, was unable to help.
There is no physical evidence apart from the statements from complainant and staff member. We are unlikely to be party to those actual statements.
The matter is now, and will continue to be, a case of she said/she said and no more.
As regards the idea that TPE deliberately "lost" the video recording, we all know that at times the TOCs are snowed under with comments and complaints, at least one last year was just sending out substantial amounts in travel vouchers by way of apology, without even investigating the complaint.
It is entirely possible that an email complaint was received by TPE, an auto response sent, and then the actual complaint not even looked at for 7 days or more - too late to retrieve any recording.
I really cannot see the point of any further analysing or discussion as nothing is going to change.
I have alluded to the fact there every TOC will have guards who are unreasonable in their duties. And not once did I claim that the guard was saintly either. I have been pointing out to others who have taken this womans word as gospel as being wrong in their actions due to the lack of a whole story from both parties involved.
Sorry to go back to this some TOCs have their own policies though it seems
https://tickets.southeasternrailway.co.uk/se/en/faqs/ViewFaq?id=9
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Moonshot said what TPE have said:
Moonshot said:
TPE are being extremely disingenuous there, unless Passenger Focus have suddenly decided to be an Ombudsman instead of a complaints echo chamber.
This is just another example of why the rail industry badly needs a proper ombudsman.
It isn't even whether the lady's complaint was valid or invalid. It is the fact that justice needs to be seen to be done. Companies cannot be trusted to investigate their own complaints, they will inevitably believe their own employee ahead of a customer. I've seen it happen with a verbally abusive bus driver at Stagecoach, of course they were going to believe him over me, that was inevitable.
For someone to have invested so much emotional energy in the incident that they're still dwelling on it two years later, all I can say that is that something must have happened.
I agree that a better ombudsman type service would be beneficial. Do you have any particular idea in mind?
With respect, it isn't always straightforward. As someone who used to deal with complaints at a senior level, I am aware of the difficulty in investigating complaints that in the end boil down into one person's word against another. It may not be a question of belief, but of whether there is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing to warrant any kind of disciplinary action. And even if action is taken, that will be a private matter between the emploer and employee.
How the allegation is dealt with, will, of necessity, require consideration of the number of incidents (if any) that the person in question has been involved, witness statements corroboration from witnesses, CCTV footage and so on.
For this reason, if I ever have reason to make a complaint against any member of staff for rudeness or verbal abuse, I would not expect to be given any the reply than along the lines of 'thanks for bringing this to our attention, the matetr will be investigated and appropriate action taken as necessary'.
I do, however, know of several employees who have been sacked over incidents with members of the public, but unless the offence is deemed gross misconduct, which can mean summary dismissal, the appropriate warnings must first be given under employment law.
This applies to all occupations, not just transport!
Yes, I agree. And I am one of those who admires her for wanting to put her side of the story. Unfortunately, a side effect of our laws is that the employee is not in a position to do the same. As such, it is impossible for anyone on this forum to make a proper judgement on what actually occurred.
That's interesting and not something I'd seen before. Doesn't apply in this instance as travel was with FTPE, but something to know for the future.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
The Financial Ombudsman Service is a fantastic example of how it can be done properly.
Definitely, I wouldn't expect to receive a letter telling me they'd sacked the guy.
However in this case there were things that were said that implied to me I wasn't being listened to.
Last edited:
I concur, but I foresee difficulties in funding such a body during a time when the government is hell bent on reducing the costs opf running the railway.
Perhaps one way around this would be for a complaints review service which would be self funding following the initial set up costs. This could be done by way of a 'costs' system awarding costs against a rail company when findings went against them, supported by a small (refundable) fee for complainants to pay when they want their complaint looked at.
Rail companies would have to be allowed to deal with a complaint first, and only when they have made a final reply could it be escalated. A fee would help to reduce the numbers of vexatious complaints, and having to pay costs if found culpable might encourage companies to deal with complaints properly in the first place, as well as be an incentive to provide a good service.
There are bound to be negatives though, which I am sure will be pointed out very quickly!
185
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 4,986
In 2009, I faced one 'via passenger focus' complaint from two passengers, who alleged they were spoken to rudely and threatened with prosecution. My company refused to disclose to me either the passengers name or any details of the passenger's allegations in the complaint.
My company had overlooked the standard report form I submitted on the day, which referred to an incident of aggressive behaviour, with threats from two drunks sat in First Class without tickets. They refused to pay the First Class fare when asked, nor would they move (there were many, many other seats). A male had (on camera) tried to punch me, then pushed me upon leaving the train whilst his wife was stood there, filming it on her phone.
My company was adamant it was going to interview me, in a type of pre-disciplinary investigation. I refused, walked out, and went straight to BTP, who could not believe what my company were doing.
British Transport Police then forced the company to hand over the full passenger details, and within days a 49-year old male from Warrington, a university lecturer was charged with and later convicted for common assault. The 47-year old wife received a police caution.
I then heard there was then some sort of legal threat from Passenger Focus to the train company about 'Handing over data-protected letters' - are they suggesting staff should be assaulted?
Advice for any staff in this situation, if a passenger is not co-operating, where available get BT Police out to them. Call them directly, yourself. It transfers customer service / duty of care to the police.
trickyvegas
Member
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2009
- Messages
- 361
I have a bit of experience of Financial Ombudsman complaints, AFAIK they charge the company who is the subject of the complaint a flat fee regardless of the final outcome. From experience, they tended to lean more towards the consumer in terms of decisions but would make sure a client had exhausted the companies own complaints process before getting involved. Although some may think it unfair to be charged for complaints that are not upheld, the financial cost of each complaint would help focus companies on working harder to resolve complaints inhouse.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
The cost of an Ombudsman service would be negligible, when you consider that the industry already funds IPFAS, IRCAS and Passenger Focus. These organisations already deal with appeals and complaints, and with training and a moderate staff increase there's no reason why it can't be centralised in a truly independent body.
ATOS won't want it done, because they much prefer the current system, which places no accountability on the TOCs.
trickyvegas said:
They charge the firm £500+VAT for each eligible complaint, but the first five complaints of any financial year are free of charge. This is to protect smaller firms, whilst discouraging companies from allowing complaints to needlessly escalate.
Taking Payment Protection Insurance out of the equation, FOS generally find in favour of the banks by a split of about 65/35. PPI claims are usually in favour of the customer, but PPI is a very specific product that has been badly mis-sold in a very specific way.
185 said:
Indeed, it protects everybody in that situation. The customer will suddenly realise that they're not quite so adamant they are right, the staff member is protected from malicious and vexatious complaints.
I deal with complaints for my organisation, and have been complained about several times for being "rude and uncooperative". Funnily enough the complaints are from people I've said no to. I understand how it works, we all do.
The rest of your post implies problems with the management in your company. Again this is an issue without an Ombudsman, there is nobody independent to look at the problem.
It's probably true about ATOC, and funding may be one of the arguments they put forward against a centralised ombudsman service. To be honest, I don't know, but I would think that bringing together those three bodies into some sort of centralised ombudsman would require some sort of additional financial resource, at least in the short term.
It was changed to £550 and the first 25 complaints free recently. Can't remember whether that includes VAT or not or indeed whether it's exempt.
It's also worth bearing in mind TPE guards are also encouraged to charge the difference, where deemed appropriate.
They can use their judgement, as the circumstances of each situation are different and therefore a different response may be appropriate.
This is wrong and I'm shocked that train companies are giving this advice to their staff. As well as their being no facility to upgrade a ticket discount, it just plays into the hands of the ever growing band of regular fare dodgers who continually 'forget' their railcards!
transmanche
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,018
But the important bit of what yorkie said is "where deemed appropriate". If a conductor sees the same person forgetting their railcard again, then presumably the upgrade option is no longer available.
So long as it's made clear to the passenger the first time, that discretion won't be shown in future, then I don't have a problem with that.
What are the chances of the guard remembering them the next time though?
In my opinion-
The ticket should be marked "no railcard shown" and then a new full price ticket issued, if they do have a railcard then they can get a refund once on the full price ticket at a ticket office by showing the railcard and tickets, if they forget it again tough they should be more careful and the aggro involved will help focus their minds.
The terms and conditions are quite clear.
- Status