Virgin heavy handed but right....

[Unixman]

With a major warning that is this is from the dreadful Canary, it refers to a amputee who was travelling on a disabled ticket who tried to board a train without his pass and was turned back by Virgin. I agree that Virgin were very heavy handed but they were, in my opinion, absolutely right to do so. Firstly: not every amputee will have a disabled pass ( you need higher PIP or mobility DLA); secondly the conditions state quite clearly that the pass needs to be carried on every rail journey. As far as passes are concerned, a disabled pass is no different from any other. Travel without it and you are liable to be charged extra.

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/09/08...gin-train-staff-didnt-believe-disabled-video/

When i activated the ticket to board the train they [Virgin staff] asked to see my railcard. I realised it must be in the cafe so I ran back to the cafe to look for it. It wasn’t there

I ran back and explained that I had lost my wallet. The Virgin staff said ‘tough, You need to go [and buy] another ticket’.

I explained that would be impossible as I don’t have my wallet now

PS: I have a disabled pass.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Canary is a terrible rag, if indeed it deserves that title. And the Euston RPIs do have a habit of being overzealous even when totally in the wrong.

But that aside, the RPI (or whoever it was) said:

"how do we know you are disabled and have a railcard?"

The former was an insensitive and stupid thing to say, possibly said in the heat of the moment. The latter was a completely valid point - the Railcard is optional and available at a fee, not every disabled person has one, only those who have chosen to purchase one.

It's not really any different to any other lost/forgotten Railcard.

This is about a Disabled Person's Railcard, NOT about any kind of pass.

 

[northwichcat]

This was featured on BBC North West Tonight last night.

 

[najaB]

It's not really any different to any other lost/forgotten Railcard.

Agreed. It's unfortunate that he lost his wallet and it would have been nice if they had agreed to carry him but there was no right to be carried with that ticket sans-railcard.

 

[BestWestern]

I imagine Virgin top brass will not be pleased, PR is king. Apology and large grovelling gesture on its way soon I would think.

 

[Hadders]

Shouldn't Virgin have applied the new 'forgotten railcard' process?

 

[yorkie]

Shouldn't Virgin have applied the new 'forgotten railcard' process?

It's possible they said that the customer could claim the cost back , if it's their first time, and the customer chose not to mention it to the media.

It's also possible the media chose not to report it (a quick glance at the website suggests it's a complete basket case, aimed at people who are easily led, and designed to outrage).

If the passenger was told exactly what he claims he was told, then the language used towards him isn't acceptable, but I'm not convinced. We may never know the truth though.

 

[BestWestern]

It's possible they said that the customer could claim the cost back , if it's their first time, and the customer chose not to mention it to the media.

It's also possible the media chose not to report it (a quick glance at the website suggests it's a complete basket case, aimed at people who are easily led, and designed to outrage).

If the passenger was told exactly what he claims he was told, then the language used towards him isn't acceptable, but I'm not convinced. We may never know the truth though.

Surely 'not going to the media' isn't a stated condition of the claiming back process?!

 

[AlterEgo]

Report conveniently omits that a Disabled Railcard is something you pay for and doesn't come free to any disabled person.

Shrill voices come to mind.

 

[Wombat]

It's possible they said that the customer could claim the cost back , if it's their first time, and the customer chose not to mention it to the media.

Surely 'not going to the media' isn't a stated condition of the claiming back process?!

It's possible they said that the customer could claim the cost back, if it's their first time, but the customer chose not to mention this statement when subsequently speaking to the media.

 

[Elecman]

Or on his twitter feed that had the whole event conveniently recorded by someone. He pushed past the Gateline staff , and was prevented from joining the train by BTP

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Or on his twitter feed that had the whole event conveniently recorded by someone. He pushed past the Gateline staff , and was prevented from joining the train by BTP

Link please?

EDIT: Twitter account is here: https://twitter.com/AndyGbootneck?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

 

[Tetchytyke]

Report conveniently omits that a Disabled Railcard is something you pay for and doesn't come free to any disabled person.

Shrill voices come to mind.

The Canary is grim. Very very grim.

It's sad that he lost his railcard. It's frustrating that you can't buy a replacement railcard at the station. But, for once, I'm going to defend Virgin. They were right. Being disabled doesn't prove he's paid the railcard fee.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Benefit of the doubt time? He had a discounted ticket, so not an out and out fare dodger. Let him travel on an UFN and see what transpires. No huge loss to VT and no PR disaster.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Canary is grim. Very very grim.

It's basically a paper for professional victims who think everything is out to get them and they should be entitled to everything, and that everything is a conspiracy. Very left wing, but not only that.

 

[AlterEgo]

Benefit of the doubt time? He had a discounted ticket, so not an out and out fare dodger. Let him travel on an UFN and see what transpires. No huge loss to VT and no PR disaster.

He still ends up paying for the new ticket. Under the new regime, you have to pay for a new ticket first before they will consider a refund.

Also, it would be a PR problem - "Virgin didn't believe I was disabled [photo of amputee stump] and fined me", because that's how a lot of people view UFNs.

The story is absolute hogwash and complete mopery. (MOPE = Most Oppressed People Ever).

You would think a former soldier would handle himself better.

 

[bnm]

Yet again, because someone allows their story to be in the media, they are castigated on this forum for doing so. And called names.

empathy noun. The ability to understand and share the feelings of others. A condition rarely found at RailUK Forums.

 

[Puffing Devil]

He still ends up paying for the new ticket. Under the new regime, you have to pay for a new ticket first before they will consider a refund.

Also, it would be a PR problem - "Virgin didn't believe I was disabled [photo of amputee stump] and fined me", because that's how a lot of people view UFNs.

The story is absolute hogwash and complete mopery. (MOPE = Most Oppressed People Ever).

You would think a former soldier would handle himself better.

Wallet and railcard lost/or stolen. No money. No cash. No cards.

As bnm says - try a little empathy. How would you feel in his shoes?

We can only comment on cases like these when they are published, there are probably many others that go unreported and also deserve attention and scrutiny.

 

[najaB]

Wallet and railcard lost/or stolen. No money. No cash. No cards.

As bnm says - try a little empathy. How would you feel in his shoe?

As I noted above, I have empathy for him losing his wallet, however if the reports that he pushed his way past the gateline (which certainly appear to be true based on the video on his Twitter feed) then any sympathy disappears. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[AlterEgo]

Wallet and railcard lost/or stolen. No money. No cash. No cards.

As bnm says - try a little empathy. How would you feel in his shoes?

We can only comment on cases like these when they are published, there are probably many others that go unreported and also deserve attention and scrutiny.

What cases? This is a case of a person who lost their railcard being told they cannot travel. That is it.

It's got nothing to do with disability or the fact he has one leg. It has everything to do with the fact that he couldn't evidence that he had a railcard (funnily enough, if he'd had a digital one, he'd have been fine, just a shout out to the detractors on that thread).

His reaction was to push past the gateline whereupon he was correctly escorted back by the BTP.

The railway doesn't have to carry people without a ticket.

Full disclosure: I have a Disabled railcard.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Rules is rules! You are right, with the strict application of the rules he should have bought a new ticket.

Some commentators think that a little empathy and understanding would have been useful in this situation - issuing an UFN and letting the guy travel would not have escalated the situation and he would not have attempted to force his way onto the train. He was wrong, but the situation could have been avoided.

Let's hope you never find yourself in a situation where a little leeway would be helpful, but is denied.

 

[najaB]

Some commentators think that a little empathy and understanding would have been useful in this situation - issuing an UFN and letting the guy travel would not have escalated the situation and he would not have attempted to force his way onto the train. He was wrong, but the situation could have been avoided.

You're making an assumption that things escalated to him pushing past the gateline as a result of being refused travel. It's equally possible that it was his reaction to being told that his ticket wasn't valid (including the attempt to push past the gateline) which resulted in final denial of travel.

I wasn't there and don't know what happened, so I'm not going to cast blame on either party. You, naturally, are free to do otherwise.

 

[AlterEgo]

Rules is rules! You are right, with the strict application of the rules he should have bought a new ticket.

Some commentators think that a little empathy and understanding would have been useful in this situation - issuing an UFN and letting the guy travel would not have escalated the situation and he would not have attempted to force his way onto the train. He was wrong, but the situation could have been avoided.

Let's hope you never find yourself in a situation where a little leeway would be helpful, but is denied.

But that doesn't stop the negative PR, it doesn't guarantee payment of the fare due. It's not correct to suggest a UFN wouldn't have escalated the situation; they can and do, as they are perceived/can be perceived as fines, the company "taking your name", etc. Incidentally he probably had no ID with which to corroborate a UFN anyway, having lost his wallet.

The correct process which ensures he gets home is to go to the ticket office and they will complete the SILK process.

Most banks will allow emergency withdrawals without card when you report a loss to them (Natwest and RBS have a facility where you just use a code). His situation was far from hopeless. The only thing VTWC did wrong here was ask, tactlessly, "how do we know you are disabled and have a railcard?" All they needed to ask was the latter half of that question.

Rules aren't always rules - if you check his Twitter feed, the Samaritan who paid his fare seems to have purchased an excess and not a new ticket.

I note your barb about "hope this doesn't happen to you"; if it did, I would withdraw emergency cash and purchase a new ticket. I definitely wouldn't be forcing my way past a gateline and then filming me getting put back in front of it by the police. Nor would I claim by omission that a disabled railcard is something all disabled people get, rather than a product you pay money for.

In my view the bulk of the blame is on the passenger on this situation, and not the TOC.

 

[Puffing Devil]

You're making an assumption that things escalated to him pushing past the gateline as a result of being refused travel. It's equally possible that it was his reaction to being told that his ticket wasn't valid (including the attempt to push past the gateline) which resulted in final denial of travel.

I wasn't there and don't know what happened, so I'm not going to cast blame on either party. You, naturally, are free to do otherwise.

Agreed - it was an assumption and all I saw was the tail end of a TV segment.

I note your barb about "hope this doesn't happen to you"; if it did, I would withdraw emergency cash and purchase a new ticket.

If you're going to quote me, please don't paraphrase and put in quotation marks.

Let's hope you never find yourself in a situation where a little leeway would be helpful, but is denied.

My point was in general, not the specifics of this scenario. You seem to be very black and white in your reasoning, which is your way. There are other views on the world around us.

 

[Agent_c]

Yet again, because someone allows their story to be in the media, they are castigated on this forum for doing so. And called names.

empathy noun. The ability to understand and share the feelings of others. A condition rarely found at RailUK Forums.

We undertand where he is coming from, but at the end of the day, he's managed to scam something he's not entitled to simply because he was a squeaky wheel.

 

[AlterEgo]

My point was in general, not the specifics of this scenario. You seem to be very black and white in your reasoning, which is your way. There are other views on the world around us.

My reasoning isn't at all black and white if you read what I posted.

I don't really value being told to "try a little empathy" - I have plenty of it, when it is appropriate. I've spent far too much time on another thread sticking up for the rights of disabled people to get on buses. There are indeed other views on the world around us - thank you for pointing that obvious fact out - I am aware of this, since I am responding to someone who doesn't agree with me!

I explained why your suggestion of just waving him through and filling out a UFN isn't practical and in my view still leads to bad PR (full disclosure, I used to work for VTWC, I've seen this stuff happen all the time! Golden rule is deal with things at the station and not onboard).

Here though, it's clear to me the passenger dealt with a difficult situation of his own making entirely wrongly, and misrepresented the substance of what happened. From the evidence we have Virgin didn't do much wrong except tactlessly ask "how do we know you are disabled?", which was the wrong thing to say. The passenger then sought to make the whole issue around Virgin not believing he was disabled, rather than the fact he'd lost a £70 railcard.

I don't have sympathy for people who go out of their way to claim victimhood like that; as I said earlier, he's a big boy and a former soldier (a Marine at that) and should have been a little more dignified.

 

[father_jack]

if you check his Twitter feed, the Samaritan who paid his fare seems to have purchased an excess and not a new ticket.

For which he can get a refund................

 

[AlterEgo]

For which he can get a refund................

It would be a bit improper to claim a refund on a ticket someone else purchased though.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Rules aren't always rules - if you check his Twitter feed, the Samaritan who paid his fare seems to have purchased an excess and not a new ticket.

Which makes you question whether his behaviour was really as bad as some are claiming. If he abused and pushed past the RPI would he have really been offered an excess? Would Virgin have agreed to carry him at all?

 

[CheesyChips]

I'm entirely on Virgin's side with this. We now live in a society where coming close to questioning somebody's disability can start talks about human rights breaches (hyperbole, I know).

So to protect those who are actualy disabled, there needs to be formal documentation to show who is eligible for certain discounts etc, otherwise the inability to verify disabilty will lead to withdrawal of such discounts across the board. Which screws all those with a disability.