Railway staff lying to the BTP

[dlj83]

Southeastern RPI's seem especially dreadful I remember seeing them fining two people in about 15 minutes of eachother and while one was writing the ticket the other inspector stood directly in front of the person and said "Don't make me come after you"

 

[RochdalePioneers]

I have a huge amount of sympathy for SarahJ's position facing pax who try to avoid paying day in day out.

However she refers to people "trying it on and trying to avoid fares". Here we have case after case of people doing neither, travelling on fares that are valid according to the contract entered into between the passengers and SarahJ's employers.

If you are presented with tickets you don't know there is a process to follow and rules to check. You as a railway employee expect us the passengers to check these rules or else we are "trying it on" yet when it comes to the opposite the attitude is that "you people" shouldn't be following the very same rules you insist we should be following.

A question. I asked earlier if guards lived in fear of their careers if not seen coming down hard enough on "fare evaders". Is that why reasonable doubt has been banned from today's railway.

Similarly, does your average person "trying it on" present complex tickets and then provide a lengthy and detailed explanation involving the rules you are contractually obliged to honour, or do they spin simplistic sob-stories made up on the spot.

Someone is indeed "trying it on". Its not us.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[OwlMan]

I have a huge amount of sympathy for SarahJ's position facing pax who try to avoid paying day in day out.

However she refers to people "trying it on and trying to avoid fares". Here we have case after case of people doing neither, travelling on fares that are valid according to the contract entered into between the passengers and SarahJ's employers.

If you are presented with tickets you don't know there is a process to follow and rules to check. You as a railway employee expect us the passengers to check these rules or else we are "trying it on" yet when it comes to the opposite the attitude is that "you people" shouldn't be following the very same rules you insist we should be following.

A question. I asked earlier if guards lived in fear of their careers if not seen coming down hard enough on "fare evaders". Is that why reasonable doubt has been banned from today's railway.

Similarly, does your average person "trying it on" present complex tickets and then provide a lengthy and detailed explanation involving the rules you are contractually obliged to honour, or do they spin simplistic sob-stories made up on the spot.

Someone is indeed "trying it on". Its not us.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

I fully agree, the problem is the 5% 9or less) of Rail Staff who see themselves above the law and able to make rules up as they go along, harrassing paying customers who have fulfilled all their contractual duties (often at considerable expense).
These "bad eggs" seem to be immune from disciplinary action from their employers and think that they are free to harass and abuse passengers as they wish.

 

[RochdalePioneers]

As I said I have huge sympathy for most of the staff who get used and abused by pax. I've witnessed guards getting abused by actual fare dodgers and have offered to be a witness.

All I would like is someone like SarahJ to accept that whilst we don't expect them to be a walking ticketing encyclopedia we do expect a but of common sense. If the ticket looks invalid as a gut feel but the passenger says its valid because of x and y, surely checking x and y is reasonable or at the very least withdrawing the ticket for investigation as is required by the rules.

Its when you get told nonsense like conditions of carriage or routing guide or accepted by all operators or you must use all maps in order are not applicable that we have to ask who is trying it on. The passenger following the rules, or the rail employee making them up on the spot. Fare evasion can lead to plod being summoned who have a clear view that ignorance of the law is no excuse. That also applies to rail crews!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[BrownE]

Age discrimination is certainly a prevalent factor. I've been patronised more times than I care to remember by inspection staff.

I certainly know that feeling; when I was 16-18 I would infrequently travel from between Reading West & Reading stations. From time to time the exposed (to the elements) TVMs would cry because they got wet and they just don't work correctly. I found it quite funny at the time so I filmed myself pressing 'Reading Stations' and ending up on the 'Henley-on-Thames' page or similar. Work wasn't customer facing and often required me to be on my hands and knees, so I wasn't exactly dressed well either.

Incidentally I had no issues until I was 17; the treatment I got was appalling compared to the other passengers from RDW (when queued at excess fares). I was asked questions sometimes like: "What time did the train leave? From which platform? What side of the train is the platform? When you crossed the footbridge...? (well no, I didn't cross the footbridge)". I was also asked to "provide evidence" I'd travelled from RDW - the receipt for Tesco (Reading West) was checked more thoroughly than most tickets. I was also threatened with the BTP if I didn't 'come clean' about where I'd travelled from.
[That matter is now closed and FGW sent me a wonderful apology and I believe a £25RTV].

The level of discrimination towards me in this case seems to be solely because I'm young and not well dressed. It really saddens me when I still see the issue nearly 3 years on, both onboard and at stations. There are excellent staff out there but too many (that I see) appear to jump at the opportunity of using the youth stereotype.

 

[W230]

With respect to the customer facing railway staff, who must get frustrated with hearing every excuse under the sun, surely they can agree that the training provided by the TOCs simply isn't good enough for some of the staff who operate out there?

But either way,what I can't understand is the refusal by some staff to check these facts. If I was in this role and a passenger told me that a ticket I thought was invalid was valid then I would do my best to check one way or the other if at all possible, rather than doing as some staff do and say such things as "NRCoC don't apply" or some other poor reason.

 

[sarahj]

Most of us have some common sence, but sometimes its not easy to know every ticket etc around. I've seen disccussions on here go round and round on if a ticket is valid. And I have to say whenever someone on here with a viald ticket for a obscure routing is questioned, one of the first posts is someone saying, poor training. I feel quite put out that all i mentioned is that day in and day out we are faced with people trying it on, from forged tickets, to no tickets, to buying short, so when someone does present an obscure tickets you might have to forgive us when we question them. After all we have no backup, cannot be exprected to walk through a train with routing guides, T&C's, easements etc. Perhaps in the future we may have access to this via some sort of smart tablet, where we put in the ticket and it says yes and no, but until then we have to rely on what we can. And to tell the truth, we come across these so rarely....

And I mentioned the incident, just to give an basic example of what we come across.

But I've been accused, and to tell the truth, just cannot be bothered.

Delete my posts and ban me please.

 

[londonboi]

From reading this from start to present I agree with what someone else has said

One thing I would like to ask RJ is if you used to work on the railways may I ask why you left. Feel free not to answer if you don't wish to

If for a bad reason you left the railways do you have a chip on your shoulder that you feel you need to possibly "challenge" the railway workers going about there everyday job. From what I have read when reading between the lines the storys seem to be one sided here and that is you throwing the whole I'm inocent card

If a ticket inspector asks to see your ticket regardless of its validity or not then YOU MUST show your ticket. If you start to cause a scene I am sorry but you deserve to have the btp called

 

[hantsman1205]

From reading this from start to present I agree with what someone else has said

One thing I would like to ask RJ is if you used to work on the railways may I ask why you left. Feel free not to answer if you don't wish to

If for a bad reason you left the railways do you have a chip on your shoulder that you feel you need to possibly "challenge" the railway workers going about there everyday job. From what I have read when reading between the lines the storys seem to be one sided here and that is you throwing the whole I'm inocent card

If a ticket inspector asks to see your ticket regardless of its validity or not then YOU MUST show your ticket. If you start to cause a scene I am sorry but you deserve to have the btp called

I don't think you have read fully all the thread.

 

[yorkie]

One thing I would like to ask RJ is if you used to work on the railways may I ask why you left. Feel free not to answer if you don't wish to

I understand he is now at University.

If for a bad reason you left the railways do you have a chip on your shoulder that you feel you need to possibly "challenge" the railway workers going about there everyday job.

I think you have misread. Where is there any suggestion that RJ is "challenging" railway workers? On the contrary, it is railway workers who are challenging RJ. If done in the right way, there is nothing wrong with 'challenging' someone, but some of them do so in a way that is inappropriate.

From what I have read when reading between the lines the storys seem to be one sided here and that is you throwing the whole I'm inocent card

I do not understand what you are saying. Can you clarify please?

If a ticket inspector asks to see your ticket regardless of its validity or not then YOU MUST show your ticket.

And the world is round, and loads of other irrelevant facts that are not in dispute. Are you suggesting that RJ has refused to show a ticket? If so can you please explain why you are making that suggestion?

If you start to cause a scene I am sorry but you deserve to have the btp called

I really think you've not actually read this thread, as if you had, you would have read numerous posts where it is quite clear that a small, but significant and very loud, minority of rail staff are the ones causing "a scene" by failing to carry out the correct procedures and escalating matters inappropriately and incorrectly.

 

[RJ]

From reading this from start to present I agree with what someone else has said

One thing I would like to ask RJ is if you used to work on the railways may I ask why you left. Feel free not to answer if you don't wish to

If for a bad reason you left the railways do you have a chip on your shoulder that you feel you need to possibly "challenge" the railway workers going about there everyday job. From what I have read when reading between the lines the storys seem to be one sided here and that is you throwing the whole I'm inocent card

If a ticket inspector asks to see your ticket regardless of its validity or not then YOU MUST show your ticket. If you start to cause a scene I am sorry but you deserve to have the btp called

I left because I required job stability to continue funding my education. I was on fixed term contracts which kept being extended for limited periods of time, with no prospects of the contract for that particular job being permanent. I was offered a permanent part time job as a London bus driver which was much also better suited to my wellbeing so I took it. I hope that anyone with any form of ongoing financial commitment will be able to sympathise with the necessity of stability.

I always travel on trains having fulfilled my obligations and have never failed to show a ticket if I have one. The problem I face is that some staff are not prepared to listen when I explain that they are valid for the journey I'm undertaken.

 

[londonboi]

I aint gonna get into a dispute here with anyone as I am in the same boat as poss everyone here bar RJ I don't see why we are all jumping on his band wagon so to speak defending him. I for one from experiance of working on the railways can almost gurantee RJ has not exactly been 100 percent compliant with the RCI/RPI's in question. And before you state what is always said when someone is not siding with RJ "can you clarrify this please". No I can't clariffy I am afraid as I was not there or present at the time in question. But what I ask yourself to do is clariffy how you know RJ is 100 inocent and telling the truth in what has been said. As I said unless you were there you can't. Its word for word

 

[RJ]

I'm a customer who writes about experiences with businesses, good or bad. It's an open forum so there's nothing to stop anyone coming on here and sharing their side of the story.

 

[soil]

I aint gonna get into a dispute here with anyone as I am in the same boat as poss everyone here bar RJ I don't see why we are all jumping on his band wagon so to speak defending him. I for one from experiance of working on the railways can almost gurantee RJ has not exactly been 100 percent compliant with the RCI/RPI's in question. And before you state what is always said when someone is not siding with RJ "can you clarrify this please". No I can't clariffy I am afraid as I was not there or present at the time in question. But what I ask yourself to do is clariffy how you know RJ is 100 inocent and telling the truth in what has been said. As I said unless you were there you can't. Its word for word

You appear to be new here.

You may therefore be unaware that there were others present on at least some of the occasions in question.

So I wonder why you with your five posts feel that you have some special insight lacking to those who have met rj, seen his tickets, watched his video footage, and so on.

 

[RJ]

Most of us have some common sence, but sometimes its not easy to know every ticket etc around. I've seen disccussions on here go round and round on if a ticket is valid. And I have to say whenever someone on here with a viald ticket for a obscure routing is questioned, one of the first posts is someone saying, poor training. I feel quite put out that all i mentioned is that day in and day out we are faced with people trying it on, from forged tickets, to no tickets, to buying short, so when someone does present an obscure tickets you might have to forgive us when we question them. After all we have no backup, cannot be exprected to walk through a train with routing guides, T&C's, easements etc. Perhaps in the future we may have access to this via some sort of smart tablet, where we put in the ticket and it says yes and no, but until then we have to rely on what we can. And to tell the truth, we come across these so rarely....

And I mentioned the incident, just to give an basic example of what we come across.

But I've been accused, and to tell the truth, just cannot be bothered.

Delete my posts and ban me please.

Sorry that you feel that way. There are very many staff out there who have dealt with the situation in a perfectly appropriate way - by giving the benefit of the doubt or taking down the details of tickets used in the knowledge that my details are known and any actual irregularities can be followed up.

My gripe is not with staff not knowing everything - I certainly don't expect them to and I have always addressed any questions I'm asked in full. My gripe is with the minority of staff who feel that listening and showing discretion is a sign of weakness and prioritise their pride/ego over common sense, to the point that they'd sooner demand large sums of money off me, delay trains and order my forced removal than do a bit of paperwork and let it go. There have actually been numerous occasions where staff have asked for BTP assistance which they refuse to entertain. Over the Easter weekend, I was quite unlucky because over the course of 4 days, they were called out 4 times with staff completely fabricating stories because they knew that a fare dispute alone was not enough to compel them to attend.

Given the large number of staff who are able to deal with the situation as appropriate, there isn't really any excuse to be made for those who don't.

 

[RPI]

A question. I asked earlier if guards lived in fear of their careers if not seen coming down hard enough on "fare evaders". Is that why reasonable doubt has been banned from today's railway.

Similarly, does your average person "trying it on" present complex tickets and then provide a lengthy and detailed explanation involving the rules you are contractually obliged to honour, or do they spin simplistic sob-stories made up on the spot.

Someone is indeed "trying it on". Its not us.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

I think what you need to realise is that for every "genuine" story like RJ's there are probably 30 who are in fact trying it on, sadly now days I have had so many who try things on and stop at nothing to do so that I mostly stick to the book and treat everyone the same.

 

[tony_mac]

So I wonder why you with your five posts feel that you have some special insight lacking to those who have met rj, seen his tickets, watched his video footage, and so on.

Mess-room gossip again?

 

[Darandio]

I aint gonna get into a dispute here with anyone as I am in the same boat as poss everyone here bar RJ I don't see why we are all jumping on his band wagon so to speak defending him. I for one from experiance of working on the railways can almost gurantee RJ has not exactly been 100 percent compliant with the RCI/RPI's in question. And before you state what is always said when someone is not siding with RJ "can you clarrify this please". No I can't clariffy I am afraid as I was not there or present at the time in question. But what I ask yourself to do is clariffy how you know RJ is 100 inocent and telling the truth in what has been said. As I said unless you were there you can't. Its word for word

So first you say that you can almost guarantee that RJ has not been 100% compliant then confirm a few words later that you actually can't? :roll:

As others have already said, at times people have been present. To appear from nowhere like you have and start throwing things around, it's near as dammit trolling.

 

[londonboi]

Thank you RJ I am not saying what you have said is lies its merley what I am trying to say is unless we were there then its word for word

Sorry ifit came across as I was trying to say you were to blame
If what you have said is 100 gospel then I hope your ok after the experiance mate
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
How isit trolling I was not there neither was you so how can we point we the finger at anyone. We can't as we don't know the facts

 

[Darandio]

How isit trolling I was not there neither was you so how can we point we the finger at anyone. We can't as we don't know the facts

I am not the one who waded into the thread all guns blazing and said

I for one from experiance of working on the railways can almost gurantee RJ has not exactly been 100 percent compliant with the RCI/RPI's in question.

Experience or no experience, you cannot "almost guarantee" anything, neither can I, but I didn't claim to.

It might be worth spending a while reading previous threads involving RJ, looking at the replies from TOC's and the like. Caution, it may take a while.

 

[tony6499]

If someone passes me a ticket and then eloquently explained its validity as RJ does then I would pass it as the valid ticket it is, if I had doubt I would note the ticket and get advice later but would have no need to get into any conflict or argument.

 

[londonboi]

Exactly tony6499
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
May I apoligise to you all if it came across I was pointing the finger

Please acceopt my apoligize

 

[RochdalePioneers]

I think what you need to realise is that for every "genuine" story like RJ's there are probably 30 who are in fact trying it on, sadly now days I have had so many who try things on and stop at nothing to do so that I mostly stick to the book and treat everyone the same.

As the main complaint made so often is RJ et all being told "the book" either doesn't exist or doesn't apply, yours is a good approach!

And to reiterate I am not blaming individual rail staff (SarahJ my apologies if you took offence at my comments) as TOC head offices seem to be driving the "book, what book" approach to the rules. If the powers that be are telling coal face staff this is how it must be then say so!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I aint gonna get into a dispute here with anyone as I am in the same boat as poss everyone here bar RJ I don't see why we are all jumping on his band wagon so to speak defending him. I for one from experiance of working on the railways can almost gurantee RJ has not exactly been 100 percent compliant with the RCI/RPI's in question. And before you state what is always said when someone is not siding with RJ "can you clarrify this please". No I can't clariffy I am afraid as I was not there or present at the time in question. But what I ask yourself to do is clariffy how you know RJ is 100 inocent and telling the truth in what has been said. As I said unless you were there you can't. Its word for word

Innocent until proven guilty chap, on all sides of the argument.

 

[tony_mac]

May I apoligise to you all if it came across I was pointing the finger

I ... can almost gurantee RJ has not exactly been 100 percent compliant with the RCI/RPI's in question.

That looks a bit like 'pointing the finger!'

But, without meaning to be rude, I think it's fair to say that written communication probably isn't your best asset, and RJ always seems happy to accept genuine apologies.


I've never been a great fan of RJ's (ticketing) antics - but I doubt that I have come across another person who has been able to give their recollections in such a calm, clear, detailed, consistent and credible way.

He has repeatedly defended himself in a credible way, but every now and again, after it has calmed down, somebody new pops up saying 'yeh, I don't have any (real) proof, but I don't believe it....' and we have to do it all over again. I am sure you can imagine that would get a bit tiresome for the rest of us.

 

[RJ]

I think what you need to realise is that for every "genuine" story like RJ's there are probably 30 who are in fact trying it on, sadly now days I have had so many who try things on and stop at nothing to do so that I mostly stick to the book and treat everyone the same.

No doubt there are a lot of fare evaders out there - but I still feel that everyone deserves to be judged as individuals on their own merits.

I'm pro-railway industry, with the belief that excellent customer service is the best way forward for customers and staff alike. Which means looking out for their safety and needs as a priority, treating them fairly (not uniformly) and being prepared to do paperwork instead of taking shortcuts.

I want to see the back of this "customer is always wrong" mentality. I also want to see the eradication of negative discrimination between passengers - if you wouldn't physically drag a pregnant lady or OAP who quite correctly stood their ground off a train, or order them to disembark onto a platform in the middle of nowhere then why do it to a 21 year old male? Wilful delays to trains because of ticket disputes, where there is no threat to the safe operation of the railway is unacceptable as it's not fair to all the other customers and railway operators who have paid for trains to run at the given time.

Lying to the police to make out an incident is more serious than it is a practice that I abhor and I feel that anybody who does this should be reported and held to account for their actions.

Treating customers with respect instead of something that has been trodden in is certainly something I'd like to see all grades of staff doing without exception, regardless of the powers bestowed upon them.

Thank you RJ I am not saying what you have said is lies its merley what I am trying to say is unless we were there then its word for word

Sorry ifit came across as I was trying to say you were to blame
If what you have said is 100 gospel then I hope your ok after the experiance mate
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
How isit trolling I was not there neither was you so how can we point we the finger at anyone. We can't as we don't know the facts

No worries - as I have said, even I have found myself falling into the mindset that other posters who have found themselves in unfortunate situations must have done something wrong as it can be very difficult to believe. But then, it's only because I think about my own experiences with front line staff, head office staff and external data handling contractors that I can actually appreciate that stories where it is apparent that the staff was completely in the wrong can actually be fully credible. Thus I appreciate it when people do believe my recollections and understand why others will treat them with scepticism.

In my case, the stories may seem a little far fetched but little by little, evidence is left as a direct consequence of my actions. Amendments to restriction codes, the National Routeing Guide, The Manual and National Rail Enquires sites, briefs issued to EMT and TPE staff and various other things.

 

[Ferret]

I just go with the evidence - and I don't see much in the way of wrongdoing on the part of RJ. And if that means I have to criticise fellow railway staff - well, so be it! That's the way I am - I stand up for what is reasonable and right. I don't see what RJ does wrong; I've never met him but if he holds a valid ticket and doesn't try and be confrontational then I refuse to see him as a wrong sort.

Let's say RJ boards my train - now, he clearly knows way more about the routeing guide than I do, and if we disagree, I have a choice. I either trust him or I don't - and if I don't, I can choose to request details. And yes, I might be demonstrably suspicious initially and I hope RJ would not take offence - ultimately, it doesn't actually matter whether I believe the ticket to be valid because my employers can decide! Armed with the benefit of knowledge, if it was RJ, I'd be inclined to believe him if I realised it was him - of course, non-savvy staff will not feel that way - well, fine. So long as they don't cross the line. And assaulting somebody who is sat in a seat is going way over that line.

What has really ****ed me off is that I feel that some staff see RJ's race as being an issue. I hate people who play the race card as the next person because somebody's skin colour should never have relevance - but there it is, I've said it now. And, let's be honest - who hasn't made the same mistake once? I have. I've seen somebody who was of a different ethnicity, thought the worst, and felt like a complete prick afterwards. And then you grow up and realise that skin colour is never relevant, it's the real person that counts. You can be a total dick whoever you are. I'm always reminded of a story regarding a director of Virgin Trains who demanded a TM removed a scruffy bloke from First Class. The scruffy bloke was none other than Sir Paul McCartney!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You should never judge a book by the cover, and I'm convinced that this happens with RJ when he has disputes over his tickets.

I'm convinced that RJ is not seeking aggro, just that he's trying to save himself some money armed with a little bit of knowledge. Are any of us any different in that regard? We live in tough times, and money is important, whether we like it or not. Those of us who are lucky enough to be staff should give the guy a break - he doesn't seem to be dishonest to me, and he's not trying to catch us out. If somebody is clever enough to effectively outwit a system, shouldn't we salute that, instead of pandering to a form of lowest common denominator and saying it is wrong?

 

[richw]

Would it not be sensible, to avoid such an unseemly confrontation (which, some may suggest, the OP seems to revel in) and pay for the ticket and make a strong complaint to the appropriate body later. As you are right you will win easily and obtain compensation and a grovelling apology.

Many people wont have the spare cash to pay and then await the refund many weeks later. Doing this may see someone who lives close to the breadline have to go without living essentials for a week or two.
Apologies for stereotyping but we have established previous RJ is at uni, which normally means very tight budgets, and making such savings are essential. I research all of my expenditure to make savings.

The appropriate example here is I look at split ticket options for any rail journeys. I actually hold 2 different railcards, a YP for when I travel on my own long distances, and a Devon and Cornwall for local journeys as these tend to be undertaken with my wife and children. A D+C permits me to take a second person with me discounted as well, which is why i purchased this as when I take wife with me I get her rate discounted and she only travels locally with me. Both railcards have saved me more than what they cost to purchase already, The YP was issued in September and I have made about £400 in savings, the D+C issued in January has saved us about £75 so far.

In many other situations running on a tight budget means forward planning and researching money saving methods. Within a mile of my house, or on my work routes I have 4 different supermarkets (1 of each of the big 4) and as my budget is very tight, I work out my shopping lists at what items are cheapest in each store, What vouchers I can obtain (many printable online vouchers) and do a small shop in each store. I've worked this to be saving me in the region of £10-15 a week.

When I went on holiday saved me a considerable amount of money flying from an obsure airport rather than Gatwick as well. The obscure airport was only about 40 miles difference in travelling than to go to Gatwick from home, yet saved us £60 an adult and £25 a child, the parking was also cheaper at that airport than Gatwick.

I fully understand reasons for researching cheaper fares, and perhaps its worth spending an hour looking up obscure ticket combinations to make a decent saving. Most evenings I am sat at home watching TV or on my Laptop, might as well use that time to work out money saving methods.

 

[soil]

What has really ****ed me off is that I feel that some staff see RJ's race as being an issue. I hate people who play the race card as the next person because somebody's skin colour should never have relevance - but there it is, I've said it now. And, let's be honest - who hasn't made the same mistake once? I have. I've seen somebody who was of a different ethnicity, thought the worst, and felt like a complete prick afterwards. And then you grow up and realise that skin colour is never relevant, it's the real person that counts. You can be a total dick whoever you are. I'm always reminded of a story regarding a director of Virgin Trains who demanded a TM removed a scruffy bloke from First Class. The scruffy bloke was none other than Sir Paul McCartney!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You should never judge a book by the cover, and I'm convinced that this happens with RJ when he has disputes over his tickets.

Actually the staff probably don't see race as an issue, it's more likely to be unconscious. Even people who describe themselves as liberal and tolerant have been shown in tests to have an instinctive prejudice against black people.

 

[Ferret]

Actually the staff probably don't see race as an issue, it's more likely to be unconscious. Even people who describe themselves as liberal and tolerant have been shown in tests to have an instinctive prejudice against black people.

I quite agree - and such an attitude will often be because somebody has had a previous bad experience. Be it conscious, be it subconscious, I wish 'it' didn't exist - but we all know 'it' does.