UPFN received for boarding the wrong service. Any advice?

[najaB]

At Kings cross there is one entrance to a train, tickets could be checked here?

For this to work each platform would have to be individually barriered. Imagine the queues if there was only one or two gates per platform and 500+ people all had to pass it to get to the train.

Unfortunately it just wouldn't be practical.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I don't agree that each individual platform should have its own barrier. This is impractical at King's Cross and utterly impossible at Doncaster.

Back in the good old days Kings Cross had staff checking tickets at the foot of the platform, which tends to stop most (though not all) of these mistakes. They do the same at Euston with Virgin Trains departures.

Off topic I know, but I don't think it is all that impractical.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

For this to work each platform would have to be individually barriered. Imagine the queues if there was only one or two gates per platform and 500+ people all had to pass it to get to the train.

Unfortunately it just wouldn't be practical.

Interestingly, there are occasional full ticket inspections at Kings Cross, but rarely and they're very labour intensive. East Coast carries about 50,000 passengers a day - not dissimilar to the other major operators - and the general principle is that it is the passenger's responsibility to choose the correct train to board corresponding with their ticket, while the companies operate regular or random ticket inspections during during journeys as they see fit. A radical change in which 50,000 tickets and trains a day are also confirmed before boarding isn't realistic.

As I mentioned in my first post, there will have been 2 on-board announcements before departure from Kings Cross which specifically identify "tickets marked Grand Central" or "GC only" which went on to confirm that "passengers holding tickets marked Grand Central or GC only will be requred to buy a new ticket". Perhaps you missed those announcments, but if you do 'appeal', that fact will be considered in assessing your statement.

On the question of trains leaving only 3 minutes apart, this represents a high frequency of service which is something passengers have been asking for - not complainnig about!

Sorry if its not what you want to hear.

 

[Deerfold]

Any comment on the RPSS website, link below
http://www.penaltyfares.co.uk/static/appeal.aspx

Unpaid Fares Appeals

Unpaid fares notices (UFN) are very different from penalty fares notices and make no extra charge, penalty or fine in the first instance. The amount outstanding shown on the UFN is only the correct fare for the actual journey that has been made. Simply, the passenger has completed their journey and now has a bill to pay because a valid ticket was not available for inspection when they travelled.

There are always mitigating circumstances for not having a valid ticket and while these may be compelling, they tend to be irrelevant to the facts of a UFN strict liabilty matter. Any appeal would therefore need to prove that the ticket shown when travelling was actually valid for the exact journey which was made. Even producing a valid ticket or railcard later does not negate liabilty to pay the UFN bill for not producing a valid ticket when requested at the time of travel.

I'm not sure there's anything encouraging there. If you're reading other sections of the website, be aware that much of it applies to Penalty Fares and so is not relevant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For this to work each platform would have to be individually barriered. Imagine the queues if there was only one or two gates per platform and 500+ people all had to pass it to get to the train.

You know that's exactly (done manually) what they do at Euston, and what they did prior to the 1990s open stations fad, right?

Such inspections may not be cost-effective as a line of automatic barriers is cheaper and possibly more effective at not missing things. But they are practical in a time sense, as they are used in places, and have been more widely in the past.

Neil

 

[Class377]

Not a critique of the website, a critique of the appeals process. I am stating it as I find it. Apparently I have a right to clear information on tickets it isn't clear and apparently RPSS should uphold where discretion not applied.

I wonder what there is to appeal? Because your advance ticket was for another train, you boarded without a valid ticket, and thus were sold a ticket. You were therefore shown discretion as RPSS specified. Would you rather they had written you up for prosecution?

The information on the ticket WAS clear - it said 16:03 on it and there's not much more they can do! If it said 16:06 by some mistake you may have had a point, but it didn't and so it's about as clear as it can be. The train company it's with is completely irrelevant to this.

 

[sheff1]

Unfortunately they won't be able to "uphold appeals where discretion has not been applied" as you put it. By definition, discretion is something that can be shown or not shown. Either will be correct and it is entirely a decision for the relevant member of staff to make. You cannot force discretion to be shown, and there will not be anything explicit setting out when discretion must be shown, therefore you can't appeal against such a decision.

RPSS state on their website that they will accept appeals** where appropriate discretion has not been used in accordance with a TOC's discretion guidelines. That suggests to me that at least some TOCs specify when discretion must be shown (although I agree that makes it not actually discretion at all)

** This relates to Penalty Fares (not Unpaid Fares) although that may not be immediately obvious to a casual viewer.

 

[bb21]

RPSS state on their website that they will accept appeals** where appropriate discretion has not been used in accordance with a TOC's discretion guidelines. That suggests to me that at least some TOCs specify when discretion must be shown (although I agree that makes it not actually discretion at all)

** This relates to Penalty Fares (not Unpaid Fares) although that may not be immediately obvious to a casual viewer.

I am unable to access the relevant page as when I click through the link provided above, it gives me an error.

If that is indeed how they worded it, then that was pretty poor, however I doubt that will affect the appeals process or the outcome much.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The discretion is for where the TOC charges the "anytime" fare regardless of time of day. Generally speaking the TOCs have agreed to charge the same fare that would have been available at the ticket office immediately prior to departure.

That doesn't help the OP as he was travelling in the peak time, however.

 

[Flamingo]

RPSS state on their website that they will accept appeals** where appropriate discretion has not been used in accordance with a TOC's discretion guidelines. That suggests to me that at least some TOCs specify when discretion must be shown (although I agree that makes it not actually discretion at all)

** This relates to Penalty Fares (not Unpaid Fares) although that may not be immediately obvious to a casual viewer.

I would think that this might refer to occasions where an easement is in place because of disruption but the staff member may not have been aware of what the easement was. (I'm sure other scenarios might come to mind.).
I seriously doubt it it means "The guard / RPI could have turned a blind eye but chose not to".

 

[bb21]

The discretion is for where the TOC charges the "anytime" fare regardless of time of day. Generally speaking the TOCs have agreed to charge the same fare that would have been available at the ticket office immediately prior to departure.

That doesn't help the OP as he was travelling in the peak time, however.

No, that only applies when the passenger boards the wrong service.

"Railcard not present" is not covered under that agreement.

 

[bnm]

What do railcards have to do with this thread? :?

 

[cjmillsnun]

What do railcards have to do with this thread? :?

Nothing from what I can see. This is to do with TOC specific tickets.

 

[sheff1]

I am unable to access the relevant page as when I click through the link provided above, it gives me an error.

If that is indeed how they worded it, then that was pretty poor, however I doubt that will affect the appeals process or the outcome much.

The wording is

Clear criteria for accepting or declining an appeal
IPFAS appeals assessors follow clear and specific criteria agreed by the DfT to decide whether a particular appeal should be accepted or declined.

Appeals will be accepted in the following situations:

* where a train operator has failed to meet the requirements of their scheme, the rules or the regulations. For example, if warning notices were not properly displayed in line with rule 4, or the passenger could not buy a ticket because there were no ticket facilities available at the station where they joined the train.

* where appropriate discretion has not been used by an authorised collector, in accordance with the train company's discretion guidelines and penalty fare rules.

Agree it will not affect this case as, as I said, the wording relates to PFs not UFNs.

 

[DelayRepay]

Not a critique of the website, a critique of the appeals process. I am stating it as I find it. Apparently I have a right to clear information on tickets it isn't clear and apparently RPSS should uphold where discretion not applied.

I think you are mis-reading the website unfortunately. I agree it says:

Appeals will be accepted in the following situations:
...
where appropriate discretion has not been used by an authorised collector, in accordance with the train company's discretion guidelines and penalty fare rules.

But this relates to passengers who wish to appeal against a Penalty Fare.

East Coast don't issue penalty fares, you have been issued with an Unpaid Fare Notice. The website has this to say:

Unpaid fares notices (UFN) are very different from penalty fares notices and make no extra charge, penalty or fine in the first instance. The amount outstanding shown on the UFN is only the correct fare for the actual journey that has been made. Simply, the passenger has completed their journey and now has a bill to pay because a valid ticket was not available for inspection when they travelled.

There are always mitigating circumstances for not having a valid ticket and while these may be compelling, they tend to be irrelevant to the facts of a UFN strict liabilty matter. Any appeal would therefore need to prove that the ticket shown when travelling was actually valid for the exact journey which was made. Even producing a valid ticket or railcard later does not negate liabilty to pay the UFN bill for not producing a valid ticket when requested at the time of travel.

I know this isn't what you want to hear, but I don't think you're going to get the outcome you want I'm afraid.

 

[Wild Swan]

At Kings cross there is one entrance to a train, tickets could be checked here?

Not true I'm afraid. There is also access to each platform by lift and escalator from the footbridge further down the platform. The automatic ticket gates (when in use) are at the entrances to the whole platform area. A further manual ticket check at the entrance to each platform would need more staff and would unnecessarily inconvenience the majority of passengers, having to put down their luggage, rummage for tickets etc. for the sake of passengers who can't correctly identify the departure time of their train (sorry if this sounds harsh, it's not meant to be). If you're at all unsure, you can always ask the on-train staff before you board.

 

[jerseyhouse]

Thanks for all your feedback, I paid tonight.

One thing that's puzzled me, I put myself in East coast shoes and thought they haven't received payment for my journey so they should be entitled to get the money from Grand Central. However, if my company had purchased an open return I could get on any train. How do they get payment for the open return journeys. How do you identify which TOC I travelled on to get the payment?

 

[Class377]

Thanks for all your feedback, I paid tonight.

One thing that's puzzled me, I put myself in East coast shoes and thought they haven't received payment for my journey so they should be entitled to get the money from Grand Central. However, if my company had purchased an open return I could get on any train. How do they get payment for the open return journeys. How do you identify which TOC I travelled on to get the payment?

It's a little bit complicated, but the gist of it is a percentage of it goes to each TOC based on overall journeys (i.e. they do a survey and see how many people use each one, extrapolate to see how much money each TOC is due, and use those proportions to split an individual ticket).

 

[Merseysider]

Thanks for all your feedback, I paid tonight.

One thing that's puzzled me, I put myself in East coast shoes and thought they haven't received payment for my journey so they should be entitled to get the money from Grand Central. However, if my company had purchased an open return I could get on any train. How do they get payment for the open return journeys. How do you identify which TOC I travelled on to get the payment?

You may find this post helpful.

 

[DelayRepay]

Thanks for all your feedback, I paid tonight.

One thing that's puzzled me, I put myself in East coast shoes and thought they haven't received payment for my journey so they should be entitled to get the money from Grand Central. However, if my company had purchased an open return I could get on any train. How do they get payment for the open return journeys. How do you identify which TOC I travelled on to get the payment?

It's split between all the operators on the route(s) you could take. So, ironically in this case, Grand Central will have received a proportion of the money from the new ticket you were forced to buy. This is why the TOCs like to offer "TOC Only" tickets - although they are cheaper they work out better for the TOC as they get to keep all the money.

 

[yorkie]

One thing that's puzzled me, I put myself in East coast shoes and thought they haven't received payment for my journey so they should be entitled to get the money from Grand Central.

They should not be entitled to get money from Grand Central, GC are innocent in this!

However, if my company had purchased an open return I could get on any train.

I agree that, if they had bought the ticket formerly known as "Open Return" and now known as "Anytime Return" (the Standard class version, the SOR, is £210) routed via "Any Permitted" route, you would, of course, have been valid.

Note that the term "open return" is best avoided these days, as there is no longer a ticket type of that name, and some time restricted tickets are described by websites as being "open returns", these are more restrictive than the ticket type formerly of that name.

How do they get payment for the open return journeys.

Through ORCATS (plenty of reading material through that search link, if you'd like further reading, but not of any use to your case)

How do you identify which TOC I travelled on to get the payment?

They don't. But a formula is used and, if disputed, passenger counts are made.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

However, the problem here is that when the third party booked these tickets, it would have been clear to them on the screen what they were booking and the restrictions/rules that applied. It would appear that they did not communicate that information to the user of the tickets. The user has then compounded the matter by boarding a different timed train to the one shown on the ticket/reservation.

This post from ages ago highlights the main problem here.

The person purchasing the tickets would know - or would have been advised what the relevant restrictions are. Had jerseyhouse purchased the tickets themselves online then they would have been advised on the restrictions during the booking process. Had they been purchased at a station ticket office then in almost all certainty they would have been attached to one of the Advance Ticket Restriction bits of paper, or at least one would have been provided. So the restrictions relating to an Advance ticket would have been much clearer.

As it happens jerseyhouse didn't buy the tickets, and it seems the person who did then did not pass on the relevant information.

This is very common with business ticketing nowadays, and I encountered a very similar situation only this evening. A group of colleagues travelling home from a meeting had a mixture of tickets. When I asked to see their tickets they all got out their little brown envelopes which had their name on. Inside were their tickets. Some had Anytime tickets, and were fine.Some had Advance tickets for about 2 hours time. So they got charged again. Now I am not disputing their innocence in all this - they clearly didn't know and hadn't been advised by their employer - but that does not negate the fact that their ticket was invalid. Somebody somewhere would know the restrictions - either the person at their employer who purchased the tickets, or as very often happens a third party travel agent who is used. It is up to them to pass on this information. The rail companies can not accept any blame for this sort of situation - which is all too common as companies seem to just buy the cheapest ticket without actually bothering to check whether it is actually suitable for the needs of the person making the journey.

 

[DelayRepay]

This is very common with business ticketing nowadays, and I encountered a very similar situation only this evening. A group of colleagues travelling home from a meeting had a mixture of tickets. When I asked to see their tickets they all got out their little brown envelopes which had their name on. Inside were their tickets. Some had Anytime tickets, and were fine.Some had Advance tickets for about 2 hours time. So they got charged again. Now I am not disputing their innocence in all this - they clearly didn't know and hadn't been advised by their employer - but that does not negate the fact that their ticket was invalid.

I've had (kind of) the opposite problem. Colleague had a Off Peak single from Manchester from London, and a seat reservation on a service after 18:00. He was very reluctant to catch an earlier train as he usually used Advance tickets and couldn't get his head around the fact that the Off Peak ticket allowed him to ignore the seat reservation. He also said it was impossible for an Off Peak ticket to be valid before 6pm and therefore insisted on waiting in Manchester for an hour as he was convinced he'd get a "fine" otherwise.

 

[Flamingo]

This post from ages ago highlights the main problem here.

The person purchasing the tickets would know - or would have been advised what the relevant restrictions are. Had jerseyhouse purchased the tickets themselves online then they would have been advised on the restrictions during the booking process. Had they been purchased at a station ticket office then in almost all certainty they would have been attached to one of the Advance Ticket Restriction bits of paper, or at least one would have been provided. So the restrictions relating to an Advance ticket would have been much clearer.

As it happens jerseyhouse didn't buy the tickets, and it seems the person who did then did not pass on the relevant information.

This is very common with business ticketing nowadays, and I encountered a very similar situation only this evening. A group of colleagues travelling home from a meeting had a mixture of tickets. When I asked to see their tickets they all got out their little brown envelopes which had their name on. Inside were their tickets. Some had Anytime tickets, and were fine.Some had Advance tickets for about 2 hours time. So they got charged again. Now I am not disputing their innocence in all this - they clearly didn't know and hadn't been advised by their employer - but that does not negate the fact that their ticket was invalid. Somebody somewhere would know the restrictions - either the person at their employer who purchased the tickets, or as very often happens a third party travel agent who is used. It is up to them to pass on this information. The rail companies can not accept any blame for this sort of situation - which is all too common as companies seem to just buy the cheapest ticket without actually bothering to check whether it is actually suitable for the needs of the person making the journey.

I'll echo this, with the added example that I am finding more and more people travelling on split tickets that "the firm bought me" without advising the passenger of the requirement to only travel on trains that stop at the split station. I'm afraid that whilst sympathetic to the individual, I am ruthless about charging them (always giving a reciept for them to claim expenses), as I don't see why my business should subsidise theirs.

 

[Spamcan81]

For this to work each platform would have to be individually barriered. Imagine the queues if there was only one or two gates per platform and 500+ people all had to pass it to get to the train.

Unfortunately it just wouldn't be practical.

That's how it used to be in the "good old days." A TI or three at the end of each platform checking tickets of those arriving and those departing. Today's railway is different of course with TOCs seeking to employ the minimum number of staff they can get away with.

 

[Flamingo]

That's how it used to be in the "good old days." A TI or three at the end of each platform checking tickets of those arriving and those departing. Today's railway is different of course with TOCs seeking to employ the minimum number of staff they can get away with.

And passengers moaning about being delayed and being treated like criminals...

 

[ASharpe]

My company goes to the other extreme and will usually book the most expensive ticket possible. I always insist on buying my own tickets and because I get them cheaper the accounts team don't mind.

But given the amount of travel people in my industry do it kind of makes sense to keep the staff happy and make travel as stress free as possible.

 

[plastictaffy]

This mistake occurs regularly on the East Coast route.

And the West Coast.......

 

[sheff1]

That's how it used to be in the "good old days." A TI or three at the end of each platform checking tickets of those arriving and those departing. Today's railway is different of course with TOCs seeking to employ the minimum number of staff they can get away with.

And passengers moaning about being delayed and being treated like criminals...

In the 'good old days' I was never turned away from the individually checked platforms at any London terminal because my valid ticket was deemed 'invalid'.

In modern times, my valid tickets have been rejected by the barriers at said terminals on a number of occasions. I have then been delayed finding a member of staff to let me through. The unnecessary delay is usually the end of the matter, but on a few occasions I have been specifically accused of attempting to travel on the railway without a valid ticket which is, as we are often told, a criminal offence ...

I know which method of operation I prefer.

 

[Spamcan81]

And passengers moaning about being delayed and being treated like criminals...

I'm talking about way back when such checks were considered part of the journey. We weren't in so much of a tearing hurry in those days. With multiple TIs doing the checks you'd need to be on a very busy train for the wait to be significant.