Details taken but unsure why

[jaffa]

Hi, today I travelled from Radley to Oxford on the 0837 which arrives on Platform 2. Radley station has no ticket buying facilities and there was no guard on the train.

Usually I get the 0820 which arrives on Platform 1 and I then walk out by the barriers and buy a ticket from the member of staff selling tickets.

Today, on arrival at Platform 2 there is a side gate. I followed everyone else and saw 2 members of staff just outside the gate, and asked one of them if I could buy a ticket from here. He told me to speak to the other member of staff who turned out to be a revenue protection inspector. He launched into his questions and asking me for ID without even explaining what was going on, and I spent around 30 minutes explaining where I had come from and all I was trying to do was buy a ticket. I feel this is very sneaky and underhand of First Great Western as I wasn't trying to evade the fare - all I did was ask the first member of staff I saw if I could buy a ticket from him. Not knowing platform 2 I thought if they did sell tickets at the side gate, it would be easier than going over the footbridge with my bike and through the barriers.

His argument was if there had not been any members of staff at the gate I would have walked through without buying a ticket. My argument was I would have gone over the footbridge in that situation and bought one. He also said there are signs saying the side gate is for ticket holders only although I did not see this and I have no idea where it is.

Can anyone advise what I should do now? I would just like this simple matter resolved. I do not feel that I have done anything particularly bad or wrong and it seems to me to be clear I was only trying to purchase a ticket in the quickest and easiest way. I don't see why the first member of staff I spoke to could not have just told me to go and buy one from the barriers.

I have had advice to write to FGW and include my single ticket from Oxford to Radley which I bought on the return home, and include the difference to make the fare up to a return ticket. I have already sent FGW and e-mail explaining my puzzlement at the situation I found myself in this morning.

Thanks for your help.

 

[bb21]

I do find this quite concerning if you were not given any opportunity to pay your fare. If there were indeed a sign, questions may be asked as to they were prominent, and obvious to all passengers alighting from the train before staff presence was spotted.

Given that there was no ticket issuing facility at Radley, you cannot be convicted under the Byelaws. Without walking past an opportunity to pay and ignoring it I also think they would struggle to have a case for fare evasion, so my gut instinct says "fight it".

Hopefully FGW would see sense and after reviewing the case, decide to drop it. I would agree with sending them the difference in fare and consider the matter closed for now. If they refuse it, I would say that you should take it to the statutory passenger body Transport Focus.

 

[W-on-Sea]

Hmm, I've not used that exit for a while, but I'm fairly that it, at least, used (within the last couple of years) to have a sign saying it was for ticket holders only; it is only open for very limited hours (morning and evening peak hours Mon-Fri) and fairly obviously doesn't lead to a ticket office...(it leads directly to a side road, not any buildings, and is on the side of the station furthest from the city centre or where most passengers are likely to be heading, given Oxford's slightly odd geography)

If the sign is NOT there, you might have a case...otherwise, well, you will have to make a good explanation of yourself.

 

[Flamingo]

Sounds to me like the OP got caught in a sting. If this is a regular journey (as they say it is) the OP would have known there are no ticket-purchasing facilities at that gate.

If the first member of staff they saw was on the wrong side of the gate, and by that stage the OP was already on the wrong side of the gate, that sounds pretty slam-dunk to me.

Wait for the letter, and start saving, would be my advice. I can't see how Passenger Focus can help with a pretty obvious fare evasion attempt.

 

[jaffa]

It doesn't lead to a ticket office, that is true, but I was hoping one of the members of staff there may have a mobile ticket machine - as you can imagine there were lots of people and I couldn't see clearly from a distance. I could see the members of staff and had I been trying to fare evade it wouldn't have made sense for me to do what I did.

The convenience of not having to take my bike over the footbridge outweighs being on the wrong side of Oxford city centre, although in this case I wasn't able to buy a ticket as I thought I may be able to.

I have not been to that gate before when it is open and there are members of staff there. I did not know they were not offering to sell tickets and had I of known this I would have gone straight to the barriers on Platform 1.

 

[transmanche]

Hmm, I've not used that exit for a while, but I'm fairly that it, at least, used (within the last couple of years) to have a sign saying it was for ticket holders only; it is only open for very limited hours (morning and evening peak hours Mon-Fri) and fairly obviously doesn't lead to a ticket office...(it leads directly to a side road, not any buildings, and is on the side of the station furthest from the city centre or where most passengers are likely to be heading, given Oxford's slightly odd geography)

If the sign is NOT there, you might have a case...otherwise, well, you will have to make a good explanation of yourself.

There's no obvious warning sign visible in either of these photos:


Platform 2, Oxford station by Phil Champion, on Flickr

 

[crehld]

Sounds to me like the OP got caught in a sting. If this is a regular journey (as they say it is) the OP would have known there are no ticket-purchasing facilities at that gate.

If the first member of staff they saw was on the wrong side of the gate, and by that stage the OP was already on the wrong side of the gate, that sounds pretty slam-dunk to me.

Wait for the letter, and start saving, would be my advice. I can't see how Passenger Focus can help with a pretty obvious fare evasion attempt.

An interesting analysis of the situation. If passengers cannot actively approach staff at the first available opportunity, perhaps you could enlighten us where a ticket could be purchased from without fear of being unduly accused of fare dodging? I only ask because I regularly find myself boarding trains with no guard presence at stations with no ticket issuing facilities, and I'm the conscientious sort who likes to ensure I've paid my way.

 

[W-on-Sea]

There's no obvious warning sign visible in either of these photos:


Platform 2, Oxford station by Phil Champion, on Flickr

The sign was on the wall, behind the phone box in the 2nd picture. If you were at the exit you would not be able to miss it.

 

[jaffa]

An interesting analysis of the situation. If passengers cannot actively approach staff at the first available opportunity, perhaps you could enlighten us where a ticket could be purchased from without fear of being unduly accused of fare dodging? I only ask because I regularly find myself boarding trains with no guard presence at stations with no ticket issuing facilities, and I'm the conscientious sort who likes to ensure I've paid my way.

Yes indeed, for me the issue here is I approached the member of staff to ask if I could buy a ticket. I was never expecting to be accused of fare dodging, it didn't even cross my mind, and I don't think the reaction of the members of staff was appropriate.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The sign was on the wall, behind the phone box in the 2nd picture. If you were at the exit you would not be able to miss it.

Trust me, I did miss it! It was peak time at Oxford and I was looking at the members of staff trying to see if they had the means to sell me a ticket.

 

[185]

Blackburn trap spreading wide and far I see

For a station with over 400 entries per day (>2014), you'd assume Radley would have at least a TVM.

 

[transmanche]

The sign was on the wall, behind the phone box in the 2nd picture.

So pretty much obscured by the phone boxes for anyone approaching from that direction. Plus the high level sign clearly visible in the first picture merely says 'Way Out to West Oxford', no mention of ticket holders only.

 

[Coolzac]

I see no basis for any kind of fine or prosecution here, as long as the OP has described events correctly. The OP hasn't had any opportunity to pay on their journey and has tried to pay at the first opportunity when they found some railway staff. The way in which the customer has been treated in this instance is awful. Imagine if you have a customer who is not experienced at using the railway and gets interviewed for 30 minutes about not buying a ticket when they have had no opportunity to do so, then not spotted a small sign telling them not to use a certain exit in a station they haven't been before?

It they want to stop this happening, how about providing some ticket issuing facilities at all stations rather than unfairly penalising customers?

 

[Flamingo]

Ok, question time for the OP.

Have you ever exited by that exit before?

Why did you chose it to exit this time?

Were the staff stopping people exiting and asking to see their tickets, or just letting everybody walk past unmolested?

Did you approach or speak to them first, or did they ask you for a ticket?

If the revenue staff had not been there, how far would you have walked / cycled before deciding that there was nowhere to buy a ticket and you needed to return to the station, and re-enter it to pay for your journey?


The OP sounds like a regular traveller on this route. I don't think we need to go down the "What if he'd never been on a train before" approach, and asking a random member of rail staff to buy a ticket off them when stopped by them after leaving a station by an exit where there is not usually anywhere to pay is not exactly making an attempt to purchase. He didn't see the staff until after he had left the station, going by his description of events, and Revenue staff do not stand there just looking at people walking past.

(I do go by the old adage, if it doesn't sound logical, it probably isn't true)

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The crucial evidence is how Jaffa responded to the questioning at the exit. (S)he may have provided persuasive evidence. As I see it, the circumstances would suggest opportunist fare evasion if it were not for one little detail - the bike and footbridge. It is credible that a passenger with a bike intending to pay would be convenienced by taking that route. But it would take some degree of probability in the evidence to persuade me (though less than the one in a billion which the Lord Chief Justice referred to today in a slightly more serious matter).

 

[steamybrian]

Nothing to do with me but...
Quote.."The person normally gets the 0820 train" sounds like a regular traveller so why not get a season ticket.?
Many of the complainants on this forum state they have only travelled from the previous station.
...makes me a little suspicious...

 

[Flamingo]

I see no basis for any kind of fine or prosecution here, as long as the OP has described events correctly. The OP hasn't had any opportunity to pay on their journey and has tried to pay at the first opportunity when they found some railway staff. The way in which the customer has been treated in this instance is awful. Imagine if you have a customer who is not experienced at using the railway and gets interviewed for 30 minutes about not buying a ticket when they have had no opportunity to do so, then not spotted a small sign telling them not to use a certain exit in a station they haven't been before?

It they want to stop this happening, how about providing some ticket issuing facilities at all stations rather than unfairly penalising customers?

You are making a lot of assumptions there. The first of which is that we have had the full story...

 

[jaffa]

Since July I have been buying returns from the member of staff at the gateline (or from a machine/member of staff a few days before). Before July, I have been buying monthly or weekly season tickets. The reason? I have a 16-25 railcard. With this, it means I can buy a ticket every day and it will still be a similar price to a weekly season. As I don't get the train every day, it makes financial sense for me to do this. If I was doing a full week on the train I would probably buy a weekly season as it is easier.

I have exited at that exit before maybe once or twice whilst having a season ticket or previously bought ticket. There has never been any members of staff there before. If there were no members of staff there I would have taken my bike over the footbridge, it was purely because I saw the members of staff that I went via the gate in the first place, thinking I could buy a ticket there and not have to take my bike over the footbridge.

 

[Coolzac]

There is a lot of 'circumstancial evidence' being thrown against the OP but the point is if you prosecuted everyone who you suspected of fare evasion with no hard proof a lot of innocent people would get stung...

There is no hard evidence of fare evasion in this case so it should be thrown out.

 

[Flamingo]

There is a lot of 'circumstancial evidence' being thrown against the OP but the point is if you prosecuted everyone who you suspected of fare evasion with no hard proof a lot of innocent people would get stung...

There is no evidence of fare evasion in this case so it should be thrown out.

You mean apart from walking out an exit where there are no facilities to buy a ticket? Anyway, I'm sure that the Revenue department will only take it to court if they think they have a good chance of a successful prosecution, and the OP will be able to put their side of it there.

I hope that the CCTV backs up their story, and doesn't show anyone with a passing resemblance to them using the exit on a regular basis.

 

[transmanche]

Quote.."The person normally gets the 0820 train" sounds like a regular traveller so why not get a season ticket.?

No need to be suspicious, I'll give you an example. If someone asked me 'Transmanche, how do you travel from King's Cross to Finsbury Park?'. Then my reply would be 'I normally take the Victoria line'. But I probably only make that specific journey a dozen or so times a year these days. (And sometimes I might take a GN service instead.)

 

[Coolzac]

You are making a lot of assumptions there. The first of which is that we have had the full story...

To be fair, I did say if the OP described events correctly.

 

[Flamingo]

Since July I have been buying returns from the member of staff at the gateline. Before July, I have been buying monthly or weekly season tickets. The reason? I have a 16-25 railcard. With this, it means I can buy a ticket every day and it will still be a similar price to a weekly season. As I don't get the train every day, it makes financial sense for me to do this.

I have exited at that exit before maybe once or twice whilst having a season ticket. There has never been any members of staff there before. If there were no members of staff there I would have taken my bike over the footbridge, it was purely because I saw the members of staff that I went via the gate in the first place, thinking I could buy a ticket there and not have to take my bike over the footbridge.

I thought you didn't see the staff until you had already exited?

 

[Coolzac]

You mean apart from walking out an exit where there are no facilities to buy a ticket?

The OP asked a member of staff for a ticket before they left station premises and before the footbridge to the ticket office. Hardly sounds like hard evidence of fare evasion, surely?

 

[jaffa]

I thought you didn't see the staff until you had already exited?

I could see the staff from the platform, I couldn't see if they had a ticket machine so went towards them in the hope they would. I didn't know there were no facilities to buy a ticket. Had I of known this, I wouldn't have gone that way! I do know when it has no staff, there are no ticket buying facilities. I have been through that gate a couple of times before but with a valid ticket (when there were no staff).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ok, question time for the OP.

Have you ever exited by that exit before?

Why did you chose it to exit this time?

Were the staff stopping people exiting and asking to see their tickets, or just letting everybody walk past unmolested?

Did you approach or speak to them first, or did they ask you for a ticket?

If the revenue staff had not been there, how far would you have walked / cycled before deciding that there was nowhere to buy a ticket and you needed to return to the station, and re-enter it to pay for your journey?


The OP sounds like a regular traveller on this route. I don't think we need to go down the "What if he'd never been on a train before" approach, and asking a random member of rail staff to buy a ticket off them when stopped by them after leaving a station by an exit where there is not usually anywhere to pay is not exactly making an attempt to purchase. He didn't see the staff until after he had left the station, going by his description of events, and Revenue staff do not stand there just looking at people walking past.

(I do go by the old adage, if it doesn't sound logical, it probably isn't true)

I spoke to the staff member first and said "can I buy a ticket from here?". I chose this exit, as I said because the train arrived on Platform 2, and I saw members of staff at this exit. I was hoping I would be able to buy a ticket from them.

 

[MikeWh]

I could see the staff from the platform, I couldn't see if they had a ticket machine so went towards them in the hope they would. I didn't know there were no facilities to buy a ticket. Had I of known this, I wouldn't have gone that way! I do know when it has no staff, there are no ticket buying facilities. I have been through that gate a couple of times before but with a valid ticket (when there were no staff).

My take on this situation: If jaffa is telling the whole story then it seems that he has been treated unfairly. Understandably, but still unfairly. Young people buying daily tickets in July/August is a common enough situation. It seems to me to be entirely reasonable that on seeing staff through the gates it should be possible to buy the ticket that so far had been impossible to obtain. The problem is that this was clearly a revenue sting and the inspectors hadn't clicked that the excuse being given was one of the very few acceptable ones for not having a ticket and trying to exit that way. The correct response would have been to direct them to the ticket office over the bridge.

I'm not sure whether it's better to try and sort the matter immediately by sending the ticket and a cheque, or to wait for the letter from the prosecutions team and respond at that time. Either way, it has to be hoped that a prosecution manager looking at the full story detatched from the actual incident will see that a mistake has been made.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There is a lot of 'circumstancial evidence' being thrown against the OP but the point is if you prosecuted everyone who you suspected of fare evasion with no hard proof a lot of innocent people would get stung...

There is no hard evidence of fare evasion in this case so it should be thrown out.

Jaffa, I can only assume that Coolzac is expressing their deeply held personal opinion here, and is not expressing an interpretation of the legal framwork within which your incident will be scrutinised. It is the evidence which is tested to the high standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt' which would secure a conviction against you, not 'circumstantial evidence'.
None of us know what that evidence is, other than you and the investigating officer, but we can make guesses about it, and from that, we can make informed predictions about how it will be applied to that high standard.

As for the assertion that "it should be thrown out", I am deeply concerned at the lack of any intellectual rigour in reaching that conclusion.
I remain far from convinced either way; though I would be asssited in reaching an 'opinion' if we had many more hard facts from jaffa.

I'm not sure whether it's better to try and sort the matter immediately by sending the ticket and a cheque, or to wait for the letter from the prosecutions team and respond at that time. . . . .

If the fare remains unpaid, then it remains beneficial for jaffa to pay that outstanding debt at the soonest opportunity (requesting a receipt). Such a payment is generally rejected by prosecutions units, understandably, and may be returned, but that doesn't negate the benefit to the passenger of making reasonable effort to pay their fare as soon as they can. Continuing to fail to pay looks very much like the actions of an opportunist fare evader.

 

[Flamingo]

My take on this situation: If jaffa is telling the whole story then it seems that he has been treated unfairly. Understandably, but still unfairly. Young people buying daily tickets in July/August is a common enough situation. It seems to me to be entirely reasonable that on seeing staff through the gates it should be possible to buy the ticket that so far had been impossible to obtain. The problem is that this was clearly a revenue sting and the inspectors hadn't clicked that the excuse being given was one of the very few acceptable ones for not having a ticket and trying to exit that way. The correct response would have been to direct them to the ticket office over the bridge.

I'm not sure whether it's better to try and sort the matter immediately by sending the ticket and a cheque, or to wait for the letter from the prosecutions team and respond at that time. Either way, it has to be hoped that a prosecution manager looking at the full story detatched from the actual incident will see that a mistake has been made.

After reading the replies, you might be right, but I would take some convincing, and it would depend on where the staff and OP were on approach to the gate, and after exit. I was asking the questions that would be asked by an RPI, or in a magistrates court (and nicer than they could have been).

The OP can only wait, and see what the letter says. Writing all the details down while they are fresh (including a diagram of where everybody was when initially seen) would also be a good idea.

Let us know how it goes.

 

[jaffa]

What hard facts would you like?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

What hard facts would you like?

All of them!
Anything which you withold from this forum is likely to skey the advice (or opinions) given to you,
Hopefully it is clear to you that the most helpfull facts are those that you have already given to the railway operator, both in terms of statements written in the inspector's notebook (I've already told you that the crucial evidence is your response to the questions about how you wpuld have paid if the inspector hadn't been there - to which you've only told us that it took 30 minutes), followed by evidence of your travel & payment history, and then any extraordinary circumstances which applied on the very same day that there was a revenue check in operation.

The only hard facts to exclude are your identifying contact details - if there's a chance that the Investigations team might know something relevant about you, then if you are to rely on any advice on here, we must know that 'something relevant' too,

 

[Coolzac]

Jaffa, I can only assume that Coolzac is expressing their deeply held personal opinion here, and is not expressing an interpretation of the legal framwork within which your incident will be scrutinised. It is the evidence which is tested to the high standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt' which would secure a conviction against you, not 'circumstantial evidence'.
None of us know what that evidence is, other than you and the investigating officer, but we can make guesses about it, and from that, we can make informed predictions about how it will be applied to that high standard.

As for the assertion that "it should be thrown out", I am deeply concerned at the lack of any intellectual rigour in reaching that conclusion.

I am basing my opinion on the facts given by the OP. If they have given false details, that is a different story. However, if what the OP says is true there is no way they should be prosecuted as they have not contravened any byelaws as they have tried to purchase a ticket at the first opportunity. Do you disagree with that or do you think the OP isn't being 100% truthful?