Trainline ticket not accepted

[RichieReb]

I was using a Trainline-bought ticket today travelling on the 10:24 from Frome to Axminster, changing at Salisbury.

When my ticket was checked by South West Rail revenue inspectors I was told my ticket was not valid as I should be going via Yeovil. I pointed out the ticket details showed the change at Salisbury.

The response was that “Trainline is a fraudulent company” and the itinerary attached to my ticket was “meaningless”. They showed me their reader which simply said “via Yeovil”. I explained the train I was getting was going via Yeovil Junction. They were insistent I should travel to Yeovil Pen Mill and change stations, which are several miles apart, despite what it said on my ticket.

I was then told my senior railcard was “probably dodgy” as it was on an app which they somehow tried to link to Trainline. Obviously it is the National Rail app.

There approach got more and more aggressive, sarcastic and disrespectful. I was described as “pedantic” for insisting my ticket was valid and gave a clear travel itinerary.

I finally said I would not say anything further to them, would not provide my personal details as requested and put in my earbuds. Before I did so one said “you’ll have to deal with the guard at Salisbury”. I said “are you threatening me?” to which I received no response.

I am a public servant and travel frequently by rail for work and often use Trainline. I have not encountered this before and have certainly never experienced this type of threatening behaviour

I have already made a formal complaint to South West Rail. Can anyone advise where else I could raise this formally? And finally, is anyone aware of Trainline being considered to be dubious and fraudulent.

I am in my sixties and have never been approached like this before.

 

[Starmill]

Sadly, this happens from time to time. You can do nothing beyond waiting for the initial complaint response. Sounds like they were talking nonsense.

Nothing wrong with trainline in this case. Industry staff are frequently defamatory of trainline however.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

@RichieReb. Welcome to the forum. How much had you paid for your ticket, presumably after railcard discount? Frome to Axminister walk up tickets are normally issued either with route "Any Permitted" or route "via Yeovil".

 

[spag23]

I hope you got his/her name. Or at least a description.
And maybe write to Trainline to let them know SWR staff are slandering them.

 

[northwichcat]

Some train operators use the Trainline's technology to sell their tickets online. Unless you were offered a split ticket option, you could easily have been sold the same ticket if you had purchased from a train operator's website.

 

[bakerstreet]

I’m sorry you have experienced this. It’s not the first time we’ve heard train company X say that we’re not national rail and conditions of carriage don’t apply, or that an itinerary means nothing etc etc.

Good that you have raised a complaint. The scan should ID the staff member concerned.

As to where else to raise this, a newspaper and / or your MP.

 

[WesternLancer]

Any value in informing Trainline about how their (seemingly in this case legitimate) products were treated by a member of staff?

If Trainline was properlly resourced staff wise (not saying it isn't) I'd expect them to take it up with the railway operator concerned.

 

[kristiang85]

This is ironic given all the ticket barriers at my local SWR station are now absolutely covered in Trainline logos.

 

[sansyy]

Did anything come from this other than a rude RPI, no penalty fare and no details given. Presuming this is just verbal from the ticket inspector you’d probably be better going to your MP which will most likely write to SWT themselves about the disrespect.

 

[Brissle Girl]

You actually committed a byelaw offence, by not providing your personal details when requested.

It's highly unlikely, but not impossible, that if you write to them in a strop they turn the tables on you and prosecute you for that.

 

[fandroid]

You actually committed a byelaw offence, by not providing your personal details when requested.

It's highly unlikely, but not impossible, that if you write to them in a strop they turn the tables on you and prosecute you for that.

Are you sure about that? I might be confusing it with the RoRA requirement to either:
show a ticket
or pay for a ticket
or give name and address.

I don't think there's a general right to demand name and address from a passenger.

The inspector obviously regarded the ticket as invalid, so that conceivably was their personal justification for them to ask for the address but as they didn't actually have a valid reason, it's hard to see any court convicting.

 

[Somewhere]

You actually committed a byelaw offence, by not providing your personal details when requested.

It's highly unlikely, but not impossible, that if you write to them in a strop they turn the tables on you and prosecute you for that.

In which case the RPI can call the police and be made to look an even bigger fool

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Are you sure about that? I might be confusing it with the RoRA requirement to either:
show a ticket
or pay for a ticket
or give name and address.

I don't think there's a general right to demand name and address from a passenger.

The inspector obviously regarded the ticket as invalid, so that conceivably was their personal justification for them to ask for the address but as they didn't actually have a valid reason, it's hard to see any court convicting.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/railway-byelaws/railway-byelaws says

Enforcement and interpretation​

23. Name and address​

1. any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person.
2. the authorised person asking for details under Byelaw 23(1) shall state the nature of the breach of any of these byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.

Note that the bar is ‘reasonably suspected by an authorised person’ rather than ‘guilty’.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I think that's a good assessment @fandroid. The inspector believed the ticket to be invalid, and arguably by not giving a name and address, the OP didn't give the railway the opportunity to resolve the matter subsequently. As I said, it's highly unlikely that anything would happen, not least because from what we can tell the inspector was wrong!

 

[AlterEgo]

Are you sure about that? I might be confusing it with the RoRA requirement to either:
show a ticket
or pay for a ticket
or give name and address.

I don't think there's a general right to demand name and address from a passenger.

The inspector obviously regarded the ticket as invalid, so that conceivably was their personal justification for them to ask for the address but as they didn't actually have a valid reason, it's hard to see any court convicting.

Bylaw 23 outlines that staff may demand the name and address of any passenger they reasonably suspect of being in breach of a Bylaw, but this is moot as there was clearly no reasonable suspicion on the part of the member of staff. I wouldn't have given them my details.

The staff member is clearly a capricious, miserable and toxic liar so I'd certainly be complaining about them.

I think that's a good assessment @fandroid. The inspector believed the ticket to be invalid, and arguably by not giving a name and address, the OP didn't give the railway the opportunity to resolve the matter subsequently. As I said, it's highly unlikely that anything would happen, not least because from what we can tell the inspector was wrong!

That isn't *reasonable* suspicion! The member of staff said the OP's ticket was only valid via Yeovil, they had gone via Yeovil, and then proceeded to say the OP had dealt with a fraudulent company and had a "probably dodgy" Railcard, another lie.

 

[fandroid]

I checked on the SWR app.

Most journeys do show a route travelling direct to Yeovil, but here is one which shows the change at Salisbury route on the "via Yeovil" routing.

Below is a screenshot of the fare shown as "via Yeovil"

And here is the route given for that "via Yeovil" fare.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Are you sure about that? I might be confusing it with the RoRA requirement to either:
show a ticket
or pay for a ticket
or give name and address.

I don't think there's a general right to demand name and address from a passenger.

The inspector obviously regarded the ticket as invalid, so that conceivably was their personal justification for them to ask for the address but as they didn't actually have a valid reason, it's hard to see any court convicting.

Byelaw 23:

1. any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person.

2. the authorised person asking for details under Byelaw 23(1) shall state the nature of the breach of any of these byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.

 

[fandroid]

The practical application of the "Any permitted" routeing is for travel via Exeter. I wonder what that inspector would have made of that? Tell the customer that it's only valid via Salisbury?

 

[OscarH]

Trainline is a fraudulent company

Sadly this isn't the first time we've seen staff on the ground refer to accredited retailers as "fraudulent" or "cowboys" during an exchange where they are contravening the most basic industry rules. I'm sure it won't be the last time it happens, I doubt it'll even result in a no-biscuits meeting

 

[RichieReb]

@RichieReb. Welcome to the forum. How much had you paid for your ticket, presumably after railcard discount? Frome to Axminister walk up tickets are normally issued either with route "Any Permitted" or route "via Yeovil".

I paid £25.19 - it was the same price going either via Salisbury or changing stations at Yeovil. I checked the Routes note on the app: “Valid only for travel via (changing trains or passing through) Yeovil.” I passed through Yeovil.

Sadly, this happens from time to time. You can do nothing beyond waiting for the initial complaint response. Sounds like they were talking nonsense.

Nothing wrong with trainline in this case. Industry staff are frequently defamatory of trainline however.

That’s interesting to know.

Any value in informing Trainline about how their (seemingly in this case legitimate) products were treated by a member of staff?

If Trainline was properlly resourced staff wise (not saying it isn't) I'd expect them to take it up with the railway operator concerned.

I have contacted Trainline to inform them of this.

 

[Haywain]

In which case the RPI can call the police and be made to look an even bigger fool

The police will not be deciding on the validity of the ticket and would almost certainly advise you to give your name and address.

 

[WesternLancer]

I have contacted Trainline to inform them of this.

Thanks for info

 

[MotCO]

The approach of BTP in the past on other threads is to take the word of the ticket inspector at face value, and therefore they would be of no use at all to the OP.

 

[RichieReb]

I’m sorry you have experienced this. It’s not the first time we’ve heard train company X say that we’re not national rail and conditions of carriage don’t apply, or that an itinerary means nothing etc etc.

Good that you have raised a complaint. The scan should ID the staff member concerned.

As to where else to raise this, a newspaper and / or your MP.

I shall be writing to my MP. I was fearful I would be taken off the train and not allowed to travel which in an area with very limited public transport is concerning. You want to know you can rely on what transport there is.

 

[AlterEgo]

The approach of BTP in the past on other threads is to take the word of the ticket inspector at face value, and therefore they would be of no use at all to the OP.

Other than to serve to make the molehill into a mountain, heaping on the embarrassment to the train company.

 

[a_user_123]

You actually committed a byelaw offence, by not providing your personal details when requested.

It's highly unlikely, but not impossible, that if you write to them in a strop they turn the tables on you and prosecute you for that.

Why, precisely, would complaining about the events be a "strop"? :

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/strop
"strop noun [C] (MOOD)

UK informal
a bad mood, especially one in which a person will not do as they are asked and is unpleasant to other people:
-Don't go in unless you have to - she's in a (real) strop.
-He's impossible to talk to when he's having one of his strops.
-When she didn't get what she wanted she threw a strop

 

[Snow1964]

@RichieReb. Welcome to the forum. How much had you paid for your ticket, presumably after railcard discount? Frome to Axminister walk up tickets are normally issued either with route "Any Permitted" or route "via Yeovil".

It says via Yeovil (the alternative route is via Exeter which at certain times of day is faster than waiting for train via Pen Mill or Salisbury)

Note doesn't say via Yeovil Pen Mill (it is any Yeovil station including Junction). Your ticket was valid, the inspector is an embarrassment.

 

[bakerstreet]

I shall be writing to my MP. I was fearful I would be taken off the train and not allowed to travel which in an area with very limited public transport is concerning. You want to know you can rely on what transport there is.

I completely understand.

Another thing - if you’re worried and are unfortunate enough to experience something similar again - is to know where the voice record button is on your phone and record the conversation as soon as a ticket is questioned. **

That way if you are treated badly or worse bundled off the train you have a record of the events.

Even if your ticket was not valid (and the forum experts have confirmed that it was - and even if it wasn’t the itinerary makes it valid) the way you were treated is extremely concerning.

** I do not know of the legalities of doing this but I would be comfortable in doing so in a train carriage.

 

[John Palmer]

As it turns out, it was feasible to travel from Frome to Axminster on a Sunday train via Pen Mill, leaving Frome at 10:28, four minutes after the OP's departure towards Salisbury in the opposite direction. But, going via Pen Mill, he would still have boarded the same train at Yeovil Junction as he actually caught from Salisbury! National Rail Enquirires confirms there is a valid itinerary for the OP's journey via Salisbury on the 10:24 from Frome. I question whether a person can be 'reasonably suspected' of a bylaw breach in the shape, presumably, of a Bylaw 18 offence when the possible infraction consisted of following an allegedly invalid itinerary that could readily be established as being valid, so I suspect that prosecution of an alleged offence under Bylaw 23 might prove to be a greater embarrassment to South Western. In any event, behaviour by RPIs of the kind described by the OP is, to put it at its mildest, highly unprofessional. Presented with the OP's itinerary, they should have checked its validity before jumping to an incorrect conclusion.

 

[RichieReb]

Why, precisely, would complaining about the events be a "strop"? :

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/strop
"strop noun [C] (MOOD)

UK informal
a bad mood, especially one in which a person will not do as they are asked and is unpleasant to other people:
-Don't go in unless you have to - she's in a (real) strop.
-He's impossible to talk to when he's having one of his strops.
-When she didn't get what she wanted she threw a

You actually committed a byelaw offence, by not providing your personal details when requested.

It's highly unlikely, but not impossible, that if you write to them in a strop they turn the tables on you and prosecute you for that.

Why the use of the word “strop”?! I wrote a reasoned and balanced complaint to the rail company detailing the aggressive and unreasonable behaviour of their employees. As a customer of that company I had entered into a financial contract with them which they were refusing, through their employees, to fulfil. I have asked South West Rail to confirm they consider Trainline to be a fraudulent company as claimed by their employee. As for not giving my details, I was prepared to wait for the police and would have given my details to them. I don’t intend to break the law and don’t expect to be bullied. I am used to giving evidence in court and know I would have a very strong case although it is quite obvious it would never go that far. I would say there is a world of difference between “strop” and standing up to corporate bullies refusing to fulfil a contractual obligation (providing a transport service that I had paid for).

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/railway-byelaws/railway-byelaws says





Note that the bar is ‘reasonably suspected by an authorised person’ rather than ‘guilty’.

“reasonable” would be the key word here in any court hearing. It works for both parties.