Rich McLean
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2012
- Messages
- 1,757
More than likely came off the Falmouth Branch
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Passengers - would you report a fare dodger?
- Thread starter trainophile
- Start date
- Status
More than likely came off the Falmouth Branch
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DarloRich
Veteran Member
For the avoidance of doubt: I am not trained to spot anyone. I dont work on trains; I travel on them.
As for getting real i could just as easily say it is those who turn a blind eye who need to get real!
They went through the barrier in front of me, that's what confused me why they were hiding
It's annoying when you know that someone is getting away with not paying their fare (in exactly the same way as it is when you witness someone shoplifting or dropping litter in the street), but it is not the job of other passengers to report such behaviour. If the Train Operating Companies are unwilling to invest in enough ticket inspectors (or, as has been mentioned in another thread, they tell their staff to turn a blind eye to passengers travelling with invalid tickets) then they deserve to lose the income.
trainophile
Established Member
Perhaps they'd bought railcard discounted tickets but didn't have one. Or even platform tickets, if such exist these days.
Last edited:
Urban Gateline
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 1,667
Having been to Truro before, I noted the one "Wide aisle gate" at the car park entrance to the station, this is only manned by video link so unfortunately can easily be abused, ie using one ticket and the others tailgate or even forcing themselves through the barrier as those gates are particularly weak! Then there is the possibility that they came off another train without tickets or the barriers were simply left open!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ooops, replied before I'd seen this post! True what the poster above said though, they could have been using child or railcard discounted tickets to which they weren't entitled to or simply short tickets for 1 stop for example!
They got off after one stop as well. So child or discounted. Unless they were up to something more serious in there as a possibility.
Completely agree; it's becoming clear that one person's argument has no credibility. More like some sort of moral crusade against fare dodgers.
Laudable, but unrealistic. :roll:
You have to be very careful when exercising that right to report someone for fare evasion though , because as other members have said It is not fair and could be legally questionable to make a false accusation like that , not to mention a waste of time and resources . The irony being if you reported someone for ticketless travel to the BTP and it turns out they do have a ticket you are then taking them BTP officers from another area where they might actually catch a fare evader . Thus also contributing to this fare increase you kept talking about
I personally dont buy into the standards of behavior are sliding but that's another debate for another day . Even If I did support that standards are on the slide , I pay my taxes for a police force to uphold the law and protect people . Its not my place to get involved if the BTP or a TOC haven't deployed adequate resources to catch ticketless travel
But to hold people in contempt or accuse them of having no stones for looking after their own safety as a priority is still disgraceful in my mind
If I saw a crime being committed It would have to take some pretty credible threats of violence to make me change my mind from offering a police witness statement or testifying in court , but I wouldn't always get physically involved in the situation there and then , because ultimately I might have a family that needs a roof putting over its head and food putting on the table . And I might be unable to do that if I get injured coming to someone else's defence .
The same reason as a guard when someone refuses to buy a ticket and becomes confrontational about it I will turn round and walk away from the situation .
JohnB57
Member
So you report every crime you see? Speeding motorists? People dropping litter or smoking where they shouldn't? Drunk and disorderly? Dogs fouling footpaths? Drivers using mobile phones? Etc...
From what you say, I assume you do report in all these cases. Bravo - you must be very busy.
thelongestroad
Member
- Joined
- 4 Dec 2011
- Messages
- 600
They might have been in the toilets for a crafty fag. Or other equally anti-social activities.
I agree with that completely its for the BTP and TOCS to come up with plans to tackle ticketless travel not the passenger
with my non railway employee hat on for a moment . I remember during my time working in retail I had a customer come up to me and accuse someone of shoplifting and trying to steal his partners handbag from her trolley , the accused heard this and a big row between the two then ensued with one of them quite seriously assaulting the other and then walking out the door . I did not step in anymore than to tell them that I would be calling the police which I then did ,I removed myself and my staff from the vicinity and let the assailant freely leave the store with about £70 worth of alcohol in his bag I did not intervene for the very reason that the area management for the store decided that we did not need a security guard there all the time and this occurred when there was not one present , so I as I was not insured nor trained or expected to undertake the role of a security guard I did nothing of the sort . If I had intervened and one of them had claimed I had assaulted them I know for a fact the company would have dropped me right in it . In this case I decided not to be a witness in court or make a statement for the police because the assailant was well known local criminal and I did not feel safe testifying against someone whose family and criminal associates knew where I worked .
As a railway employee I am not told to turn a blind eye , but I might as well be because there isnt much I can do and when it comes down to it this is what you could end up doing . When someone refuses to buy a ticket ,the only tools I have are asking them to leave the train , giving them a UPFN or getting the BTP to come and deal with them if they refuse both of those .
If they agree to leave the train , they have still not paid for the journey and will jump on the next one to their destination .
If they agree to a UPFN and give correct details then problem solved , they pay for the journey and their details are on record for future reference if they attempt the same again .
But if they refuse either of them , and continue to refuse to purchase a ticket there is not a lot I can do unless the majority of the passengers wish to wait whilst the BTP come to attend for someone refusing to pay when the average fare on my TOC is £2.50 . I suspect they often dont . The company would not take too kindly over a massive delay bill for this either .
All I can do in this situation is ring the BTP and see if there is any chance of them intercepting us before the person leaves the service . And reporting their details to my own company so guards at my depot can be made aware as well as the BTP so they can keep a look out .
Personally As a guard I would like to see my TOC employ traveling ticket inspectors (RPI's or RPA's ) in the area I operate there aren't any . I would like the traveling revenue staff to have powers to physically remove someone from the train and to have the same powers the police have to request a persons details for the purpose of a UPFN or a penalty fare . Id also like to see more BTP officers on patrol .
Last edited:
High Dyke
Established Member
LOL. Impractical to introduce...but funny nevertheless. Perhaps we could also have indications for when people book tickets through websites that charge a booking fee.
Back to the topic though. Myself, wife and a friend were travelling on a GA service - Harwich branch - when a 'local' did the usual straight in the toilet trick. As we are all railway staff we mentioned the point to the guard when he came through. He continued his checks and as he returned he politely knocked on the toilet door. An exchange lasted for 2-3 minutes before he decided to use his key to enter. Magically the door opened and out stepped sheepish looking youth. He gave some explanation about borrowing money from his mate to get home later. As the guard ensured he left the train at the next station the youth was advised that "i'm working this train for the rest of the day so you better be able to pay for a ticket later."
We tried our best not to smirk at his misfortune in being caught out....
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Don't be silly. Unlike some i can not claim to perfect. I simply try to do the best i can.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Clearly. However the OP asked of they should tell the gaurd. I think you should. It is up to him to decide what to do using his training and experience. I am not suggesting you jump up and shout J'accuse!
Neither do I - but many do. They seem more than happy to complain and not do anything!
My exact words were: So yes. Report them. Speak to the guard. If you dont have the stones for that text or twitter the TOC or BTP i meant speak to the guard NOT accost the dodger. You have to asses the danger and act appropriately.
Agree - see above. You cant simply march in like John Wayne.
Your training and experience allows you to asses and act appropriately, hence why i say report it to the guard.
JohnB57
Member
You started it...
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Apologies for giving an opinion. I shall try simply to agree from now on.
I know you are saying to report it to the guard not to the person involved . But if the person involved twigs on that you have reported them to the guard they might then make you the target of verbal of physhical abuse for poking your nose in .
I really have not got an issue with saying that people have the right to report it to the guard .As long as they are prepared for the fallout of wasting resources and accusing someone of something they have not done if the person turns out to have a ticket .
I still dont thing its the passengers job to police the train, and if the TOC and BTP cant come together with plans to tackle fare evaders I speaking a a passenger here wont go out of my way to protect revenue for the company , I am paying to travel on the train not to carry out revenue duties on board it .
My problem was with the strong way in which your earlier post was written where you suggested that not reporting a fare evader to the guard was contemptible . or that those that chose not to report to the guard had no stones . When ultimately it is a personal choice and nobody should be compelled to involve themselves in a way they are uncomfortable with .
If in your opinion fare evaders are a big problem and you feel fed up with paying the additional cost in the fare to cover unpaid journies then feel free to go and report it to the guard , but dont tell me or any other passengers what they should and shouldn't be doing .
Last edited:
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Fair enough. I just dont like people turning the other way while people are extracting the urine. It isn't right.
trainophile
Established Member
What's this "stones" thing? A new one on me. Is it a euphemism for certain spherical objects often used in various sports? 
So if a guard has discretion to ignore or walk away from a fare evader who, in his judgement, might threaten his safety... how does the policy stand as regards other forms of antisocial behaviour on the train? If a group of youths are drinking (i.e. becoming drunk) on a dry train, or causing serious annoyance to other passengers by raucous swearing, is the guard contractually obliged to step in, or is it again a judgement call?
Not criticising guards at all, they have my utmost respect, but just curious.
So if a guard has discretion to ignore or walk away from a fare evader who, in his judgement, might threaten his safety... how does the policy stand as regards other forms of antisocial behaviour on the train? If a group of youths are drinking (i.e. becoming drunk) on a dry train, or causing serious annoyance to other passengers by raucous swearing, is the guard contractually obliged to step in, or is it again a judgement call?
Not criticising guards at all, they have my utmost respect, but just curious.
What's this "stones" thing? A new one on me. Is it a euphemism for certain spherical objects often used in various sports?
So if a guard has discretion to ignore or walk away from a fare evader who, in his judgement, might threaten his safety... how does the policy stand as regards other forms of antisocial behaviour on the train? If a group of youths are drinking (i.e. becoming drunk) on a dry train, or causing serious annoyance to other passengers by raucous swearing, is the guard contractually obliged to step in, or is it again a judgement call?
Not criticising guards at all, they have my utmost respect, but just curious.
I would imagine training not allowing him to tackle them alone. Call for BTP back up for example.
JohnB57
Member
Just suggesting that bad stuff happens everywhere, not just on the railway.
You can't criticise people for turning the other cheek where fare dodging is concerned if you're prepared to ignore equally illegal or even anti-social activity elsewhere.
indeed you cant .......so maybe the answer lies in a " 3 strikes and out " policy of laws governing anti social behavior......ie misdemean 3 times and a mandatory 5 years prison sentence applies?
JohnB57
Member
It'd certainly make it a lot quieter in Poundland.
Mutant Lemming
Established Member
I can't help feeling Neighbourhood Watch would never have taken off if everyone had this outlook, and Crimewatch wouldn't be worth screening
!
What often gets me is the way fare dodging is portrayed as one of the most heinous crimes that requires draconian punishment and torture. Am sure you would be happy for your local constabulary to rush off to the nearest station to nick some punk kid who hasn't paid his £2.40 train fare instead of apprehending the burglars breaking in to your house or the violent muggers hanging around at the end of your street. Okay, fare dodging is an anti-social act and is a crime but the threads on here quite often put it on a par with Murder and violent crime.
I have called the police to people engaged in criminal activity on the railway (resulting in prosecutions) and would not hesitate in doing so but I would not do so without evidence of criminal activity.
Many TOC don't see it as cost effective to bother collecting fares on certain routes at certain times and if they aren't going to make the effort why should any of the rest of us step in to take the risk ?
Well, if it's not cyclists defending their law breaking by pointing out motorists break the law too and are more dangerous, we have people that seem to believe that the police can only concentrate on really serious crimes, like burglars, muggers and presumably murderers and rapists.
And do they prioritise rapists over burglars when resources are stretched, or just ignore all other crimes completely?
If someone said to a police officer 'Haven't you got anything better to do than do me for xxxx' then they should expect the reply 'Yes, and thanks to you I'm not able to'.
I am a firm believer that society needs enforcement of these less serious crimes, as it just sends out the message that you'll get away with it. And then you can perhaps consider becoming a bit more adventurous. Fare evasion here, a theft there, some anti-social ('What the f**k are you going to do about it?') behaviour and maybe then moving on to violence. Fare evasion today doesn't mean murder tomorrow, but I do believe there's a link between petty crime and more serious crime.
Just look at the success of any stings at stations carried out in conjunction with the police. People not buying tickets are, perhaps unsurprisingly, rather disproportionately found to be involved in other more serious crimes. It's almost as if the police should do the ticket checks, with the power to use stop and search on those that don't pay. I bet that would soon have people paying their way!
And do they prioritise rapists over burglars when resources are stretched, or just ignore all other crimes completely?
If someone said to a police officer 'Haven't you got anything better to do than do me for xxxx' then they should expect the reply 'Yes, and thanks to you I'm not able to'.
I am a firm believer that society needs enforcement of these less serious crimes, as it just sends out the message that you'll get away with it. And then you can perhaps consider becoming a bit more adventurous. Fare evasion here, a theft there, some anti-social ('What the f**k are you going to do about it?') behaviour and maybe then moving on to violence. Fare evasion today doesn't mean murder tomorrow, but I do believe there's a link between petty crime and more serious crime.
Just look at the success of any stings at stations carried out in conjunction with the police. People not buying tickets are, perhaps unsurprisingly, rather disproportionately found to be involved in other more serious crimes. It's almost as if the police should do the ticket checks, with the power to use stop and search on those that don't pay. I bet that would soon have people paying their way!
JohnB57
Member
This is the key point isn't it? The "honesty box" approach to payment only works if you actually provide a box and clear instructions on how to deposit money in it.
Ultimately depends what is at stake . If its just a few drunk people being a bit rowdy as long as they pose no risk of harming themselves or others I would just leave them getting on with it depending on the service they are on and how busy/what other passengers are on that service . I might point out to them that they are annoying other passengers , or try and mediate by moving the rowdy passengers to one end of the train and those that want a quiet journey home to the other end .What's this "stones" thing? A new one on me. Is it a euphemism for certain spherical objects often used in various sports?
So if a guard has discretion to ignore or walk away from a fare evader who, in his judgement, might threaten his safety... how does the policy stand as regards other forms of antisocial behaviour on the train? If a group of youths are drinking (i.e. becoming drunk) on a dry train, or causing serious annoyance to other passengers by raucous swearing, is the guard contractually obliged to step in, or is it again a judgement call?
Not criticising guards at all, they have my utmost respect, but just curious.
If I go and try and have a word with them and they dont seem to react well to my authority / requests to move to make a more comfortable journey for other passengers or stop drinking because it is a dry train then depending on their mannerisms and attitude towards me I may decide I no longer want them traveling on my service and it may be necessary to summon the BTP to escort them from the railway . This is not because it is my train and what I say goes but because in an emergency situation I need to be confident that I can at least make efforts to control passengers on my own and I would not feel safe/want to take responsibility for a group of passengers that due to their intoxication or whatever show no signs of respecting authority or being able to listen and reason .
Another time It would be necessary to intervene/summon btp assistance is if they are posing a risk of harming themselves or others . This is something fare evaders dont do hence why delaying the train for ages to wait to BTP would not IMO be warranted . In that situation causing a delay is wholly justified because safety comes above all else . Even if someone has got themselves into that kind of situation through no fault but their own I have a duty of care to them whilst they are on my train or on railway property .
Its also worth bearing in mind that the kind of disruption that happens late on a Friday and Saturday happens when the rail network is not as busy . If delaying the last train of the night to wait for the BTP means everyone including me gets home safe so be it , because unlike peak times it is likely only going to effect that one train so the knock on delay bill wont be as high (personally I think delays due to disruptive passengers should not be chargable).
5 years in prison for anti social behavior ?
Which doesnt stop fare evasion on Metrolink trams .
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Absolutely .....under a 3 strikes and out policy
Im not defending people who fare evade or saying the police shouldnt do something about it . But the police only have finite resources and so do have to focus on crimes where there is an actual direct victim and the stakes are high like rape and murder , cycling down to burglary,theft etc etc . We have a hierarchy of crimes for a reason and people would be annoyed if they found out their local police force was investing millions of pounds into traffic resources to catch speeders for example when burglaries or muggings or rapes where at an all time high .
Personally I think one thing that could be done to tackle fare evasion is give TOC's more power to employ people that can travel about in teams for their own safety and can forcibly remove or require details from and fine people traveling without tickets . And the DFT as standard should specify number of these employees to be employed by each TOC .
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
just so we are clear
What sort of things do you class as antisocial behavior ?
the same as what everyone else does......so dont bother arguing with me on a discussion forum which has no bargaining rights in the real world.....its just my opinion and you aint gonna change it
- Status