Unpaid Fare Notice - Newcastle - Edinburgh 8/10/11 - Advice Please?

[First class]

I

Pretty sure that WOULD be illegal!

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/live...-guard-flashed-at-passengers-100252-24532523/

Has happened before, sort of...

 

[DaveNewcastle]

It is a common law requirement.

. . . .

(Note: There are some limited exceptions to this for uniformed police officers, but only in very restricted circumstances)

This is all horribly off topic, but your, er, advice on this thread cannot remain unchallenged.
The relevant authorities are PACE S.24 and 25. Section 25 was repealed by SOCA. Please check your authorities and let us know how your 'opinions' apply here.

 

[michael769]

It could be: X123 - Scotrail. That is sufficient whether in plain clothes, in uniform, naked anything!

Indeed it is, but I think it is clear that the RPI refused to identify himeslf in any manner that would comply with that clause when requested and thus failed to comply with the regulations.

So I say again how does the OP know his UPFN is genuine? The uniform is not enough on it's own, it is not unheard of for fraudsters to obtain genuine looking uniforms.

How does this requirement (which I haven't previously heard of, please forgive my ignorance) fit in with the railway byelaws?

See FirstClass' post!

But in any case it does not need to fit in as it is an overriding requirement of law. Put simply the courts accept that in order for a member of the public to be expected to comply with the requests of an official person it is a fundamental requirement that the public needs to be able to confirm that that person is indeed official.

Until such time as the official properly identifies himself he is just another member of the public. If I came up to you and demanded your name and then handed you a piece of paper you have never seen before which require you to send me £89 would you seriously send me a cheque in the post, just because I was wearing what looked like a uniform?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The relevant authorities are PACE S.24 and 25. Section 25 was repealed by SOCA. Please check your authorities and let us know how your 'opinions' apply here.

S.24 and S.25 only relate to powers of arrest. The OP was not arrested.

 

[alanf]

Just to defend myself as was pointed out in post 58 the train had not departed. The kidnap statement was a bit lighthearted. Im wonderering if a few TMs are on this thread looking after their own.What would have happened if the doors weren't locked and the OP and his family forced their way off the train.

Alan

 

[Darandio]

The OP did not suggest that it was a moving train. Or even one that had actually been dispatched at the time he asked. Read it carefully again.

And from the confines of a Mk4, how does the OP know whether the train had already been dispatched or not? The doors were closed and locked, the train was in a state of dispatch from that point onwards.

Are you suggesting that they unlock all doors and allow the OP off the train and delaying it even further simply because they got on the wrong train?

 

[bengolding]

Why did you not read the platform screen at Newcaslte, as the train pulled in to ensure it was your correct service?

 

[exile]

IMO, it is all going to fall down to the fact that he boardrd the wrong train. Yes, it is a pretty easy mistake to make but what he should have done, no disrespect, was double check that he was going to be on the right train. I know from past experiences if a train comes in that doesn't look like our train, I will always double check with the nearest available member of station staff, be it on the station or on the train, to make sure that this is the right train. It's a simple thing to do or forget but this could have been the difference

The £89 UPN

Sorry, I just don't buy this. Do all 100 people boarding a train in the 1 minute a train is stopped have to find the guard (before they board?) and ask him if this is the right train (possibly inviting an "of course it is" (with the unspoken thought - "idiot passengers")). I realise you've said "if it doesn't look like my train" but in this case both trains were operated by the same TOC.

At Liverpool Lime St there is the classic "getting on the train at the back instead of the one at the front (or vice versa)" scenario. However, this does NOT result in the staff issuing reams of unpaid fare notices. I wonder why the difference?

PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES.

 

[alanf]

Im suggesting it. It would have cost maybe a minute for what may have been a dispatchers fault anyhow. We don't know all the facts but it would be interesting to find out.

Alan

 

[Darandio]

Im suggesting it. It would have cost maybe a minute for what may have been a dispatchers fault anyhow. We don't know all the facts but it would be interesting to find out.

Alan

How the hell has it come down to being a dispatchers fault?

 

[michael769]

@DaveNewcastle - I'll try to track down some relevant authorities tomorrow when I have access to our database!

@alanw - I agree with the others that an appeal will be an uphill struggle. The might be some mileage in challenging the UPFN on the grounds that you asked them to identify themselves and they failed to do so Under Reg 23(3) (as posted by FirstClass). Although you (I suspect) did not ask for an ID that complied with Reg 23, I would think that a reasonable person would conclude that by asking for their name you were in effect requiring them to identify themselves. The biggest problem with that is that the UPFN is not issued due to a breach of the byelaws (but under the NCoC) and therefore Reg 23 might not apply. The common law requirement is not something that an adjudicator can consider directly, so I'd not view your chances of success as being particularly high.

But I would still be inclined to complain to the ToC about his refusal to identify himself. Even if Reg 23 does not apply failing to properly identify himself in such a situation is not acceptable behaviour, and I doubt very much his employers will condone such behaviour, unless you gave him some reasonable grounds to fear for his safety. It will as others have noted be your word against them, but it will (if you word it reasonably and calmly) be a factor that, along with your reasonable difficulties in identifying that you were on the wrong train might lead the ToC to offer a refund on the grounds of poor customer service.

 

[sheff1]

Why did you not read the platform screen at Newcaslte, as the train pulled in to ensure it was your correct service?

Screens are not always correct - as at New St last night.

 

[exile]

There is no doubt the staff concerned acted correctly - or at least in conformance with the rules.... but shouldn't discretion be shown when it's clearly an honest mistake and not an attempt to evade? Do you think the OP will be thinking "I must travel by train next time"?

How much, precisely, did the passenger's mistake cost the TOC?

 

[table38]

Screens are not always correct - as at New St last night.

True enough, Huddersfield for some reason is also mysterious; the display on Platform 1 often shows the previous train, and when I was sat in the waiting room last Thursday, the 10:35 to Wakey mysteriously disappeared from the summary screen around 10:25.

 

[exile]

Screens are not always correct - as at New St last night.

Too right! I've boarded a train where the display AND the announcement stated "all stations" to find the train flying past my station. No doubt I should have paid an excess to get back to my station.

 

[snail]

Until such time as the official properly identifies himself he is just another member of the public.

Read the first post again:

"I refused to sign for the UFN and asked for the ticket inspectors name (which he did not give but stated his UFN would trace back to him)."

The TOC will be able to verify whether the person with the ID number on the Notice was working that train at that time. If they can't, then it will be invalid.

 

[Yew]

Where there an automated announcements? Those are usually pretty stupid, so if it said "the next train to arrive in platform x is the xx:54 to newcastle 5mins before it arrived that would be 1 minuite before the train that came in at :50?

Personally I think you have a reasonable chance, you where at the correct platform, within a reasonable tolerance of the correct time (if it's scheduled for a :54 departure, then it probably arrives around :52 at the latest, So running two mins early would be understandable


Then once realising the train and attempting to exit, only to find that The announcement had not been made in suitable time to allow you to check your tickets, collect your belongings and leave.


So overall quite a few mitigating factors that will work in your favour.

 

[Darandio]

Where there an automated announcements?

Announcements are not automated at Newcastle.

 

[WelshBluebird]

There is really no excuse to board the incorrect train and I don't buy the argument that it's an easy mistake to make if a train is running late and arrives at the same time

Really?
It can be VERY easy to do. Especially if the platform screens are not up to date (as is common). Indeed, there have been a couple of times where I have seen the train itself have the wrong destination on the front of it, and the platform screen wrong. Very confusing indeed. Oh and automated announcements can be just as bad!

I am presuming there was no rush involved as you were booked in advance and would have arrived in good time,

Big assumption indeed. While it is good practice to get there early, that is not always possible for many reasons (that are not under the passengers influence).

 

[michael769]

Read the first post again:

"I refused to sign for the UFN and asked for the ticket inspectors name (which he did not give but stated his UFN would trace back to him)."

I don't really think that responding in such a manner is acceptable in such circumstances.

 

[scotsman]

I don't really think that responding in such a manner is acceptable in such circumstances.

It depends on the attitude of the passenger, I had a passenger last night whom I would not have given my surname to last night - had it not been on my badge or had he asked for it

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't really think that responding in such a manner is acceptable in such circumstances.

You don't know the circumstances.

We know nothing of the OP's demeanour on the train, for example. Other than there was a protracted debate and he refused to sign the UFN.

 

[p123]

This is a really poor example of customer service.

However, like a lot of other people have said in this thread no valid ticket = UPFN.

But, it's not quite as black and white as that. I'm still relatively new to the forums so I'm not going to stick my neck out and give advice, but I'd offer the following observations:

a) Exactly how long did you have to leave the train after the announcement about which service it was? It's illegal to try to board or alight a train during the dispatch process, therefore if the announcement were made as the platform staff were (or moments before it) 'blowing the whistle and waving the flag' (so to speak) then it could be argued there was no chance of knowing you were on the wrong train - in which case it's entirely East Coast's fault.

b) Having worked in a job in the past where I was in contact with the public, I can sympathise with the guard for not wanting to reveal their full name. However, there must be accountability. Given that they already may not have given passengers a reasonable chance of leaving the train and (in my opinion) didn't quite employ common sense when issuing the UPFN one has to wonder if they weren't wearing a name badge, and then refused to give a name, what did they have to hide? If they truly believed that they were correct and were delivering the customer service as outlined in the Passengers' Charter, surely there would be no problem in having their name passed to EC Customer Services?

c) A slight link to my last point with regards to customer service and common sense. I'd point out that in EC's Passengers' Charter it states: "Our staff should always treat you fairly" - which I'd read to mean that when you told them they hadn't given you enough time to leave the train after the announcement, they should have left it at that. It also states, with regards to delays "We will keep you informed about the delay on trains
and stations." - therefore if the platform screens at Newcastle didn't show the correct train, and no announcement was made, I'd say EC was entirely at fault here.

 

[Darandio]

therefore if the platform screens at Newcastle didn't show the correct train, and no announcement was made, I'd say EC was entirely at fault here.

Thats an important point though. The OP made absolutely no mention of looking at platform screens, even admitting to "assuming" it was the correct service.

Therefore, that point seems irrelevant to me anyway.

 

[jon0844]

I very nearly did this at York when a delayed train turned up a few minutes before our train was due to leave. I had got on, but managed to ask a member of staff and DID get off in time.

The screens showed OUR train as being next, but when I stepped off and checked again - it had changed. There may have been an announcement but I'm pretty sure there wasn't - and the screen wasn't in easy sight of where we stood for our particular zone/coach.

We had an advanced ticket, so no doubt would have been done too - but I'd have almost certainly argued, even if it wasn't EC's fault but the system (Atos?) at York messing up. Given we'd quite likely find our seats occupied, we may well have found ourselves forced to stand too (the service was quite busy).

Given how many people boarded, I am sure some made the same mistake.

The Atos system for FCC often swaps trains around, even when you can see they're all running as normal and nothing has been delayed. Only last week, Potters Bar was swapping my train to King's Cross from platform 1 to 2 to 1 to 2 almost every minute! I am sure it had been given a path and wasn't constantly changing! Obviously FCC don't have reserved seats or advanced tickets, but I'd have hoped common sense would have prevailed in this case where it's obvious the OP was caught out and hadn't attempted to chance getting on an earlier train just 2-3 minutes before the correct one (again, with the chance that the seats would be taken by someone else).

I really do hope that EC, as they usually do, put customer service ahead of the 'rules' in this case.

 

[Welshman]

Only tangentially relevant to this case, but a thought occured to me that I thought would tie in with this thread. If the train the OP was booked on (the 17:54) had been showing on the screens as delayed, even just by a couple of minutes, do I understand correctly that in that circumstance it would have been OK to board the earlier delayed train with an Advance for the later one?

The National Rail Advance Terms and Conditions say "If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey." If one train is so badly delayed that it departs within 4 minutes of the next one, there's probably a reasonable chance that this following train will be at least slightly delayed too. And seeing the conditions don't require any minimum amount of delay to have elapsed (I think it was John@Home who pointed this out), I wonder is it permitted (if you know your train is going to be delayed - again, even just by a couple of minutes) to get on an earlier train to ensure you reach your destination on time.

Or do the words "the next available train" preclude boarding a train that departs before the original train's scheduled departure time? I was just thinking this could potentially be a useful defence in similar circumstances to those encountered by the OP.

Just out of interest, a similar thing happened to me at Grantham a while back. I enquired if I could get the late-running earlier train [which would be departing about the same time as the one I was booked on], in order to maintain connections later down the line, but was told that late train was still the earlier one, nonetheless, and I had to watch it go and wait for my booked train, which was now also late, miss my connections and hello, delay repay form.

Sometimes using your initiative is not welcomed.

 

[158801]

Surely an Unpaid Fares Notice has the name of the person issuing it on it ? Ours do.

The easiest thing in the world is for someone on here to take an overview of what happened and make a judgement.

It's an entirely different story when you're the guard and you have to make a decision on the spot.

 

[bb21]

Surely an Unpaid Fares Notice has the name of the person issuing it on it ? Ours do.

I thought that it only needs to be some kind of identification traceable back to the member of staff, ie, staff number, etc, and not necessarily his/her name.

 

[garethgray]

I need to post 5 times before I can PM so trying to make up the number.

To clarify a couple of points in case anyone has any further advice:

I checked the passenger display upon arrival at the station (40mins prior to train departure time). It did not show our train as being delayed and given there was no further audio announcement to advise of delays, we took seats on the platform from which the information display was not readable.

My demeanour on the train was professional, polite but understandably frustrated.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The ticket inspectors name was provided on the UFN but was not given to me when I asked for it - not sure why. He did not appear to be wearing a name badge.

 

[MikeWh]

You can't post twice in a row on the same thread. But you can now say something else.

 

[garethgray]

haha! cheers Mike. Need to get the post count up so I can PM someone.