Railway staff lying to the BTP

[Swirlz]

I don't share the opinion that going from Canterbury West to Tilbury Riverside via the shortest rail route is absurd. It's specifically permitted in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. The ticket is restricted to the permitted routes that pass through either of the Tilbury Stations.

Bear in mind I was not asked to leave the railway at any point. They just wanted me off the Class 395 operated service. Southeastern's staff actively advised me to use a more circuitous route, several miles longer into London Bridge then onto Fenchurch Street - but the ticket bears no Maltese Cross and was not valid to cross London. It is not the shortest route or a permitted route by any stretch of the imagination. This was essentially a form of entrapment as nobody who told me to travel by that illegitimate route was prepared to issue a chit indemnifying me from further conflict on the advised route - had I gone by that route, I would have been committing an offence. As I say, it's not unknown for these people to deliberately try and goad me into committing an offence, even under the pretence of sincerity. Quite fortunately for me I'd already checked the permitted routes and so was not susceptible to such a trap.

Please forgive me if I have missed the point, but what has case law relating to a passenger failing to show a valid ticket got to do with this?

It is questionable if those REOs were actually attempting to remove me from the railway. I stated clearly that I was prepared to wait patiently for the BTP to attend and that I would speak to them in the hope of having the dispute resolved. Both of those REOs knew for a fact that it was physically impossible to remove me from that train - my size and weight alone meant that getting me out of an airline seat was not an attainable objective for those two REOs. Even if they did manage to get me into the aisle, room for maneuverability was zero due to various obstructions such as fixed seats, protruding armrests and other passengers. Therefore, the only logical conclusion was that they were not trying to remove me at all - but rather just attempting to get me to assault them. They only stopped when I clearly stated that I was not going to retaliate and that the whole incident was being captured on CCTV.

Chinese burns and applying severe levels of pressure to sensitive wounds is deemed to be reasonable force?

Given I voluntarily left the train, precisely what offence did I commit?



It should also be noted that the Canterbury to Tilbury ticket in question is significantly cheaper than a Canterbury to Gravesend ticket.

If you voluntarily left the train, how did you sustain any injuries and/or why did they try to remove you?

Did you only voluntarily leave the train AFTER they had attempted to physically eject you from the service?

Surely, for this to make any sense, you must have initially declined to leave the train after them asking you to?

The case law bit referred to a forum member stating that you cannot be arrested fare evasion - not your posts.

 

[WillPS]

I'm reminded of an incident around this time last year involving a large number of members of this forum and a train from Inverness to London. On that occasion there was apparently a large party of BTP ready to meet us at Edinburgh, although an off duty BTP officer on board managed to prevent that from happening.

I wonder what the BTP were told and by whom to elicit such a response.

 

[RJ]

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, I've just checked through the fares database, and Stratford Regional and Stratford International are both explicitly excluded from the route in question, so shouldn't be offered by journey planners or a TIS. Though I must admit that I wouldn't have known that if I hadn't specifically checked for it...

How enforceable that is given it's not printed on the ticket, however, is an exercise for the reader, but I'd guess they're also relying on our old friend "Easement" 600069:

I would assume that the intention is for passengers to travel to Gravesend, and pay for the ferry separately, with the "Excluding Ferry" indicating that it's not included in the fare.

This is reinforced by the same route being available for the c2c route East of Upminster, including the Ockendon branch, and also on the Greater Anglia Southminster and Southend branches East of Wickford.

How you're supposed to get from Tilbury to the GA branches avoiding Stratford remains to be seen, however! Logic suggests utilising Upminster - Romford or walking from Southend Central to Victoria.

There are no negative easements concerning the ticket and no negative route restrictions shown on the ticket - only a positive one which is compliant with the shortest route by rail anyway.

The easement you have mentioned is irrelevant as I wasn't making a journey from "Straford Domestic" to London St Pancras.

With respect to the intention, Southeastern's own website shows the ticket to be routed "Via Tilbury but Not via Ferry."

A discussion was had about Southminster to Canterbury West via Tilbury. It was suggested travel via Romford, Upminster, Pitsea, Tilbury, Dagenham Dock, Barking, Woodgrange Park, Stratford Group and Ashford International would be the shortest route by rail.

 

[barrykas]

NRE states:

"Travel must involve passing through or changing at Tilbury, but does not include use of the Ferry service."

For any plain reading of the English language, that means that you must pass through Tilbury (so you couldn't go via Basildon, say, on a Pitsea-Strood ticket), but you cannot use the Ferry.

There is nothing at all to suggest that you should use the ferry, and tender separate payment for it.

Try again. It states that it does not include use of the ferry, which is not the same thing at all. It doesn't forbid use of the ferry in the slightest! The ticket is also valid for break of journey, which could conceivably include use of the ferry.

Travel via Stratford also fails the "shortest route" test by a considerable margin if the route restriction is taken as I believe c2c (as the owner of the flow) intend:

Canterbury - Stratford International - Stratford Regional - Romford - Upminster - Grays - Tilbury Town clocks in at 85.5 miles, with the walk between Stratford International and Stratford Regional, and bus between Tilbury Town and Tilbury Riverside, counting as zero miles.

Canterbury - Gillingham - Gravesend - Tilbury is 36.25 miles, the walk from Canterbury West to East and ferry between Gravesend and Tilbury counting as zero miles.

Sorry...But you will not convince me that a ticket as described is valid via HS1 unless I either see it in writing from c2c, or you can find a ticket which does include the Tilbury - Gravesend ferry.

 

[RJ]

If you voluntarily left the train, how did you sustain any injuries and/or why did they try to remove you?

Did you only voluntarily leave the train AFTER they had attempted to physically eject you from the service?

Surely, for this to make any sense, you must have initially declined to leave the train after them asking you to?

The case law bit referred to a forum member stating that you cannot be arrested fare evasion - not your posts.

So I did miss the point - my apologies.

Not sure what part of it doesn't make sense. Whatever it was those REOs were trying to achieve, removing me by force was physically impossible and far beyond their capabilities, which they both knew before they put their hands on me.

I left the train of my own accord, not through being removed by force - the BTP only turned up after I was on the platform.

Try again. It states that it does not include use of the ferry, which is not the same thing at all. It doesn't forbid use of the ferry in the slightest! The ticket is also valid for break of journey, which could conceivably include use of the ferry.

Travel via Stratford also fails the "shortest route" test by a considerable margin if the route restriction is taken as I believe c2c (as the owner of the flow) intend:

Canterbury - Stratford International - Stratford Regional - Romford - Upminster - Grays - Tilbury Town clocks in at 85.5 miles, with the walk between Stratford International and Stratford Regional, and bus between Tilbury Town and Tilbury Riverside, counting as zero miles.

Canterbury - Gillingham - Gravesend - Tilbury is 36.25 miles, the walk from Canterbury West to East and ferry between Gravesend and Tilbury counting as zero miles.

Sorry...But you will not convince me that a ticket as described is valid via HS1 unless I either see it in writing from c2c, or you can find a ticket which does include the Tilbury - Gravesend ferry.

Small problem there - the ferry doesn't run on rails! Is the ferry service shown in the eNRT?

Southeastern's own booking engine gives the route as "Via Tilbury but Not via Ferry" - how would you interpret the term "Not via Ferry?"

 

[soil]

Try again. It states that it does not include use of the ferry, which is not the same thing at all. It doesn't forbid use of the ferry in the slightest! The ticket is also valid for break of journey, which could conceivably include use of the ferry.

Travel via Stratford also fails the "shortest route" test by a considerable margin if the route restriction is taken as I believe c2c (as the owner of the flow) intend:

I am not clear where intent comes into matters. The restriction states that you must 'pass through or change at' Tilbury. It also suggests that 'the ferry' is not included. Quite what 'the ferry' is a mystery to most people - it was to me, I had no idea there was any such ferry.

The 'intent' of a Woolwich Arsenal - Southend Airport, route 'TILBY EXCL FERRY' is beyond me.

Therefore the fact is that passengers should comply with the Conditions of Carriage, which state that you should comply with the route on the ticket, which is to pass through, or change at, Tilbury, 'excluding the ferry'.

Even if the ticket said "Via Tilbury Crossing", the Routeing Guide states

"The shortest route for any journey is always a permitted route" "This can be
checked, and the distance between stations calculated, from the National Rail
Timetable."

So in my view, if the ticket stated, which it does not, "Via Tilbury Crossing", then it would still be valid via Stratford Intl.

The shortest route from Canterbury West to Tilbury is to Stratford (London):

Canterbury West - Ashford International - Tonbridge - Sevenoaks - New Cross - Canonbury - Stratford at 76.5 miles

then from there via Barking to Tilbury

Rj's route,

Canterbury West - Stratford Intl - walk - Stratford was 12.25 miles shorter than this (64.25 miles), and therefore permitted.

From Canterbury East, the shortest route is again to Stratford (London), as follows:
Canterbury East - Faversham - Gravesend - Bexleyheath - New Cross - Canonbury - Stratford, at 66.25 miles

So even if we argue that the ticket was only valid from one station or the other on the shortest route, RJ's route was still shorter, and therefore valid.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It also apparent from the NRCoC, (http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/static/documents/content/NRCOC.pdf) that it is any case not possible for a ticket to force you to go between two points by ferry.

"(d) The use of some tickets may be restricted to trains which take:

(i) routes passing through, or avoiding, particular locations; or

(ii) the most direct route. These restrictions will be shown on the ticket"

In this case, the ticket requires you to 'pass through' Tilbury. There's simply no way to enforce someone's mode of travel when they have left the railway.

For example, a 'Via St Albans Abbey' ticket might be valid to walk between St Albans and St Albans Abbey stations, but there'd be nothing to stop you getting a taxi, bus, camel, or helicopter.

In this case the ticket requires you to go via Tilbury.

From what I can see, the required restriction on this ticket would be something like TBRY NOT LND/EBB

That will still allow you to travel to New Cross, of course.

 

[Ferret]

What would the guards on this forum do in this situation? You have a passenger with tickets you deem invalid, they're refusing to buy a new ticket or hand over any more money and they won't leave the train? What do you do then? Let it go or call the BTP?

If they've offered name and address details to you, then you do a TIR! But how many Guards know that that's even an option? As 156441 says - the training offered is inadequate.

Let's look at the anecdotal evidence available to all of us. Our very own Flamingo has said that his employers haven't shown him what a TIR is, let alone how to do one. Furthermore, from the recent documentary shown on the BBC, you may recall that Virgin West Coast TM ejecting an alleged faredodger from the train at Crewe, who then got into a brief altercation on the platform and then pontificated about what a good Train Manager he is, when what he should've done was to get name and address details and write a TIR, or get Police assistance. One wonders how he would've handled RJ - get off the train or I'm calling the BTP? He was lucky with the Crewe faredodger incident, blokey got off and shouted the odds at him, rather than refusing and staying put. I did wonder what may have occurred had the cameras not been present - that could easily have resulted in an assault. Not clever.

I'm afraid I can quite see how RJ's situations escalate. Poorly trained staff only see their point of view, and then when RJ challenges that point of view, they see it as a challenge to their authority, and then attempt to reimpose that authority, usually in an inappropriate way - whether it be incorrectly issuing a UFN, a PF or physically trying to remove him.

The TIR procedure exists for a few reasons, but one is for disputed routeings. If done properly, it saves the potential for confrontation, and it saves delaying other passengers and racking up delay minutes which cost the train company more than the fare is worth. It saves wasting Police time too.....

 

[Fred26]

Can I ask, what was the intended journey with your ticket? I'm just curious as to whether you were travelling from Canterbury to Tilbury or finishing short.

 

[W-on-Sea]

IIRC The Tilbury Ferry once upon a time (up until the mid-1980s) was operated by Sealink. Possibly then it may have been possible to buy integrated tickets valid on the ferry and on trains on some Kent-Essex (or vice versa) journeys? Nowadays, no train tickets are valid on the ferry.

 

[High Dyke]

In the absence of any other information what else can you do?

Not opine in this particular topic?

 

[GatwickDepress]

SouthEastern's gateline staff are hardly the most well-trained chaps at the best of times. Last October, departing St Pancras International, a member of staff insisted that my ticket (which wouldn't go through the barrier) was invalid on the grounds that HS1 "don't go there [Hastings]".

IIRC The Tilbury Ferry once upon a time (up until the mid-1980s) was operated by Sealink. Possibly then it may have been possible to buy integrated tickets valid on the ferry and on trains on some Kent-Essex (or vice versa) journeys? Nowadays, no train tickets are valid on the ferry.

It was set up by the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway in 1852 just for passenger use. Upon nationalisation, control of the ferry was handed over to the London Midland Region of British Railways and then the Eastern Region in 1959, before being handed over to Sealink in 1979 as part of British Rail's sectorisation (I'm not too sure about that last bit). I'd say it was certainly in Sealink's portfolio by the mid-80s. I daresay it was integrated into ticketing systems throughout it's history.

 

[michael769]

What happens if you get arrested for fare evasion and it is later proved that you hadn't evaded the fare?

You get acquitted and can reclaim your defense costs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In order for rj to be arrested, there would have to be grounds for it, such as him being violent or whatever. Obviously if the staff lie about this, then they may get in trouble with the police.

Or "to ensure a prompt and efficient investigation". Basically the police can arrest anyone for anything these days.

 

[RJ]

Try again. It states that it does not include use of the ferry, which is not the same thing at all. It doesn't forbid use of the ferry in the slightest! The ticket is also valid for break of journey, which could conceivably include use of the ferry.

Travel via Stratford also fails the "shortest route" test by a considerable margin if the route restriction is taken as I believe c2c (as the owner of the flow) intend:

Canterbury - Stratford International - Stratford Regional - Romford - Upminster - Grays - Tilbury Town clocks in at 85.5 miles, with the walk between Stratford International and Stratford Regional, and bus between Tilbury Town and Tilbury Riverside, counting as zero miles.

Canterbury - Gillingham - Gravesend - Tilbury is 36.25 miles, the walk from Canterbury West to East and ferry between Gravesend and Tilbury counting as zero miles.

Sorry...But you will not convince me that a ticket as described is valid via HS1 unless I either see it in writing from c2c, or you can find a ticket which does include the Tilbury - Gravesend ferry.

Hi,

As is given by one of the first pages in the NRG instructions, the shortest route can only be given by using the NRT. I'm using the present full edition of the eNRT available on the Network Rail website.

As far as I can tell, the NRT bears no reference to this ferry you speak of. Tilbury Riverside is shown in the timetables, but is not even shown to have a shipping link in either the diagrammatic maps or the timetable columns, unlike stations like Holyhead and Portsmouth.

The Tilbury Town to Tilbury Riverside shuttle is shown in Table 1a but neither a shipping symbol is shown, nor a footnote alluding to any ferry service, unlike tables go

I've also looked at every single entry to Gravesend in tables 194/200, 203, 204, 206, 207, 208 and 212 and it is not given as a shipping link either.

The network maps on pages 3122 and 3123 bear no reference to any ferry between Tilbury and Gravesend.

Seeing as the NRT is given as the source to refer to when calculating mileages, how are you justifying manadatory use of the ferry?

 

[Ferret]

Why are we even discussing the routeing guide when RJ writes:

When I was able to leave Ashford International after a 3.5 hour delay, I was armed with an itinerary from the ticket office showing HS1 as a valid route for the ticket I held.

Would anyone care to hazard a guess what the procedure is for dealing with a *possibly* invalid ticket complete with a travel itinerary from a booking office?

 

[Mojo]

FWIW; I used tickets routed Tilby Excl Ferry to travel on Highspeed services to Stratford for several months. On every occasion this was accompanied by a valid itinerary. In early February, after over 20 trouble free journeys, I was made to pay an excess to the +Any Permitted fare after the Onboard Manager showed me an email on his phone regarding a regular customer (not me or RJ) using this ticket.

I noticed immediately after this, and my complaint, booking sites stopped selling this route.

FWIW; I consider Canterbury West - Ashford - Stratford - Woodgrange Park - Barking - Tilbury to be the shortest route by train. Bear in mind the NRCoC says you may travel on TRAINS over the shortest route. I'm aware that in some cases vehicles that are not trains can count as trains for certain legislation (eg. Rail replacement buses) but cannot see how the ferry in this case counts as a train. FWIW, the Southeastern website says of this ticket "via Tilbury but not Via Ferry."

 

[yorkie]

Sorry...But you will not convince me that a ticket as described is valid via HS1 unless I either see it in writing from c2c, or you can find a ticket which does include the Tilbury - Gravesend ferry.

Oh damn, I forgot about the Secret Conditions of Carriage, Condition 23(h):

"Every ticket is NOT valid, unless it is stated in writing that it is intended to be valid by the TOC who sets the fare"

Damn, we're in BIG trouble if we have to adhere to these secret rules ad:

And there was me thinking the NRCoC applied, but it was all a dream?!...

SouthEastern's gateline staff are hardly the most well-trained chaps at the best of times. Last October, departing St Pancras International, a member of staff insisted that my ticket (which wouldn't go through the barrier) was invalid on the grounds that HS1 "don't go there [Hastings]".

Indeed, there are loads of people who have had problems, and your experience is not untypical. What happened next?

Why are we even discussing the routeing guide when RJ writes:

When I was able to leave Ashford International after a 3.5 hour delay, I was armed with an itinerary from the ticket office showing HS1 as a valid route for the ticket I held.

Would anyone care to hazard a guess what the procedure is for dealing with a *possibly* invalid ticket complete with a travel itinerary from a booking office?

And who is gonna make SET staff adhere to the correct procedure? The toothless Passenger Focus? Haha. The DfT? hahaha! ATOC? Now this is getting really funny! No-one, I tell you. No-one can make them adhere to the rules and procedures!

SETs procedure is to disregard the itinerary, and I can't see anyone bringing SET into account, so they will keep on doing it. I've witnessed it myself. It's happened before, and it'll happen again.

 

[michael769]

And who is gonna make SET staff adhere to the correct procedure? The toothless Passenger Focus? Haha. The DfT? hahaha! ATOC? Now this is getting really funny! No-one, I tell you. No-one can make them adhere to the rules and procedures!

The courts can! if one had a lot of money to spend and the confidence (or thick skin) to take the hassle and stress of following through with a case then issuing a claim for breach of contract would make a point.

Probably not an avenue I'd recommend for most people though - even though the ToC would probably cave once they realized the claimant was serious rather than risk having their behavior to tested in a court.

 

[Ferret]

Well, not adhering to the procedure I described has cost them money in delay minutes it seems (I base this on an earlier post referring to a Tweet about a disruptive passenger). It will further cost them money in administration as RJ will no doubt be requiring the return of his 50 quid! This seems like a spectacular own goal to me.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Being curious I tried a hypothetical journey from my local station to Canterbury. If I specified Canterbury West, it suggested a route via London St Pancras, thus using HS1. If I specified Canterbury East, it suggested via London Victoria. The HS1 route was 20 minutes faster, but the ticket price was the same. Whether the tickets would have been identical whichever route was selected I don't know. It doesn't seem that for journeys of which HS1 is a part that any premium fares are charged as against the traditional route.

However London St P to Canterbury is more expensive than Victoria to Canterbury. This is an example where a through ticket is less expensive than a split ticket as the first half of the journey would be local station to London U1.

 

[Wolfie]

You get acquitted and can reclaim your defense costs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Or "to ensure a prompt and efficient investigation". Basically the police can arrest anyone for anything these days.

Indeed. although the number of cases going through the courts for wrongful arrest and the amounts of compensation being paid out by the Police as a result are going up almost exponentially as a direct result...

 

[RochdalePioneers]

SouthEastern's gateline staff are hardly the most well-trained chaps at the best of times. Last October, departing St Pancras International, a member of staff insisted that my ticket (which wouldn't go through the barrier) was invalid on the grounds that HS1 "don't go there [Hastings]".

I also had a ticket to Hastings rejected by the STP barrier. In my case the ticket was looked at for about 20 seconds before they opened the gate for me. On board the guard didn't bat an eyelid and even told me which platform at Ashford the Hastings train would leave from.

Isn't the issue here that SE are trying to maxinise their premium fares for HS1 so that any ticket that hasn't had the +HS1 premium applied is automatically suspicious? Somewhat ridiculously my Finsbury Park to Hastings Rte Any Permitted ticket was priced by them, but rejected by the gate line anyway.

Perhaps they would prefer it if HS1 was operated like Heathrow Express ie not a part of the national network therefore a blanket ban on all tickets unless a premium is added to their satisfaction.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Wolfie]

Oh damn, I forgot about the Secret Conditions of Carriage, Condition 23(h):



Damn, we're in BIG trouble if we have to adhere to these secret rules ad:

And there was me thinking the NRCoC applied, but it was all a dream?!...


Indeed, there are loads of people who have had problems, and your experience is not untypical. What happened next?

And who is gonna make SET staff adhere to the correct procedure? The toothless Passenger Focus? Haha. The DfT? hahaha! ATOC? Now this is getting really funny! No-one, I tell you. No-one can make them adhere to the rules and procedures!

SETs procedure is to disregard the itinerary, and I can't see anyone bringing SET into account, so they will keep on doing it. I've witnessed it myself. It's happened before, and it'll happen again.

Yorkie

One way of bringing it to a head is to take legal action for unlawful arrest (sorry, but what RJ describes being done to him at Stratford in terms of his detention meets the definition) against SET AND its staff! Oh, and make damn sure its all over the media what he is doing and why...

It might wake up a few of the "honourable" folk in the Gothic pile in SW1!!!

 

[Clip]

I also had a ticket to Hastings rejected by the STP barrier. In my case the ticket was looked at for about 20 seconds before they opened the gate for me. On board the guard didn't bat an eyelid and even told me which platform at Ashford the Hastings train would leave from.

Isn't the issue here that SE are trying to maxinise their premium fares for HS1 so that any ticket that hasn't had the +HS1 premium applied is automatically suspicious? Somewhat ridiculously my Finsbury Park to Hastings Rte Any Permitted ticket was priced by them, but rejected by the gate line anyway.

Perhaps they would prefer it if HS1 was operated like Heathrow Express ie not a part of the national network therefore a blanket ban on all tickets unless a premium is added to their satisfaction.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

They would love that but they would never get away with it which is why they probably have the barriers set as they are. Whats even stranger is the other week a Portas Pilot ticket,which you could only purchase from them and is available only on their routes(including HS1) got rejected at the barrier. Its just pathetic really and someone, somewhere should really start to clamp down on their odd practices.

 

[jb]

One way of bringing it to a head is to take legal action for unlawful arrest (sorry, but what RJ describes being done to him at Stratford in terms of his detention meets the definition) against SET AND its staff! Oh, and make damn sure its all over the media what he is doing and why...

It might wake up a few of the "honourable" folk in the Gothic pile in SW1!!!

The media is one thing - but michael769 has outlined above, pretty convincingly to my eyes, that "wrong" and "subject to legal redress" are far from one and the same.

 

[BillyBoy]

If he is using a route that is completely absurd, and illogical to the common man, there is likely to be a "reasonable belief" that the ticket is not valid, and an offence has been committed under Railway Byelaw 18. All you need is the Inspector to hold "reasonable belief", even if that belief is wrong or misguided.

Before finding this forum I had reasonable beliefs like I could start short on an Advance ticket or I could bypass the ticket office and buy on the train.

 

[jon0844]

Perhaps they would prefer it if HS1 was operated like Heathrow Express ie not a part of the national network therefore a blanket ban on all tickets unless a premium is added to their satisfaction.

Don't give them ideas!!

The only fair way to sort this is to simply get rid of the HS1 supplement altogether and allow Stratford International (a station without any International services) to become part of the zonal system.

I do hope that this happens one day, but won't hold my breath.

The media is one thing - but michael769 has outlined above, pretty convincingly to my eyes, that "wrong" and "subject to legal redress" are far from one and the same.

The media could see this as a great chance to bash the railway and stand up for RJ for trying to get the most value for money, but I suspect it could backfire and the media would actually side with the railway and think RJ is just up to no good and not paying his way, not understanding the rules and possibly even getting jealous or envious of his ability to pay less.

But, as I said before, one day RJ will have to make a decision on how to carry on with this. While many ticket combinations are 'fixed', clearly there are more and more complicated examples that will likely land RJ in even more trouble and I just can't see how any one man can have the time to deal with what must soon be tens of individual complaints and claims.

I expect the resistance to go public is to protect the revenue saving potential, but there must come a point where RJ (and others who are less vocal on here) will decide enough is enough and take action to bring this problem to the public eye and see if something can be done.

Either that or a TOC just gives RJ an all-line-rover for free to silence him once and for all (possibly the cheapest solution in the long run!).

 

[jb]

Before finding this forum I had reasonable beliefs like I could start short on an Advance ticket or I could bypass the ticket office and buy on the train.

Maybe beliefs should be "permitted" rather than "reasonable"?

 

[michael769]

The reality is that a concerted and public effort to stop this behavior would simply provoke the industry to put more effort into closing these types of loopholes. I know they would be unlikely to succeed, but a lot would still be lost in the process.

 

[GatwickDepress]

Indeed, there are loads of people who have had problems, and your experience is not untypical. What happened next?

I'd love to say I was calm and resolved the situation through gentile wit and loveable charm.

Unfortunately, I must've seemed aggressive enough to warrant both the gatekeeper's supervisor and a BTP officer being called out. The BTP officer was quite nice towards me but snarky towards both members of SET staff - I wager he wasn't happy at being called out to such a major crisis.

The supervisor took my ticket, spent a good minute looking at it, grunted, begrudgingly let me through, and warned me to make sure I purchased an "All London ticket" next time. I don't quite know what he meant by that, but I presume it was utter crap.

I also had a ticket to Hastings rejected by the STP barrier. In my case the ticket was looked at for about 20 seconds before they opened the gate for me. On board the guard didn't bat an eyelid and even told me which platform at Ashford the Hastings train would leave from.

Isn't the issue here that SE are trying to maxinise their premium fares for HS1 so that any ticket that hasn't had the +HS1 premium applied is automatically suspicious? Somewhat ridiculously my Finsbury Park to Hastings Rte Any Permitted ticket was priced by them, but rejected by the gate line anyway.

Perhaps they would prefer it if HS1 was operated like Heathrow Express ie not a part of the national network therefore a blanket ban on all tickets unless a premium is added to their satisfaction.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

SouthEastern would probably leap at the chance to run it like the Heathrow Express; all those fancy trains with fancy fares to match.

I just don't understand it. Booking, platform and on-train staff are normally lovely, it just seems to be the HS1 gateline staff that are completely ignorant/ordered to be total bar stewards...

 

[jon0844]

The thing is, the trains aren't that fancy - just new. So they can go at 140mph? Wow, so could the Mk4s if they were allowed to - and how old are they?!

There's no first class, even though you could argue that with less passengers and a 2+2 layout, the whole train is nearer to first class on some commuter trains than standard. But, that in itself doesn't justify the premium.

In fact, I've never understood the justification for the premium, any more than the levy on users (higher than normal fare increases) for many years before HS1 opened - with the people buying annual seasons paying a load more to get a ticket that was marked 'not HS1'.

I believe first class ticket holders can go on HS1 with no supplement (or at least season ticket holders) but given there's no first class, I'm not sure that's really much of a benefit should the train usage ever increase to a level where you'll struggle to get a seat.

Having last used a 395 with a buggy, I also found that the small lip by the door also made it very hard to get on and off - it's just enough to make it hard to push the buggy over it without it getting caught. Without a photo, it's hard to explain, but I had to get help from the train manager (who was very nice - but then I had a +HS1 ticket!) so that's another downside for a brand-new train in my opinion!

Once we get more new trains elsewhere on the network, such as the stock for Thameslink and Crossrail and the 395s begin to age, I doubt anyone will remain as impressed as they are now and will begin to wonder why they can't use any ticket and why Stratford International is magically outside the zonal system.

[Off topic - Has anyone been on the newly refurbished Heathrow Express trains in first class, even if just to look around at Paddington before the train leaves, thus not paying? As one of the HEX guards said to me, it's like a disco in there - loads of room! And all the fancy lighting.. wow! They look like brand new trains]