Should we get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion?

[swt class 450]

Should we get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion in the UK and if someone doesn't have a ticket when checked then they either have to buy one or get off at the next stop if they refuse? Isn't the current penalty fares and prosecutions system a complete failure?

All that our current system does it target the honest people who have made honest mistakes while the real fare evaders always get away.

When the real fare evaders get caught by RPIs they will simply just refuse to pay or give any details or they will just walk off the train or they will get aggressive and threaten the RPIs so they always just get away with it.

Where as the honest people who have made honest mistakes (such as thinking they can buy a ticket onboard or buying the wrong ticket or travelling on the wrong train or travelling on the wrong route etc etc etc) are the ones that will always pay and give their details. So these are the people who always end up unfairly getting caught out.

And then we have the ridiculous system where on the some trains if you are caught by a Guard then you can just buy a ticket but if you are caught by an RPI then they can give you a penalty fare or prosecute you. So there is no consistency either.

In many countries in Mainland Europe they don't have any penalty fares or prosecutions in place. If you don't have a ticket when checked then they simply make you purchase one onboard. If you refuse to buy one then they just make you get off at the next stop. This seems like a much more fair system. If this works in these countries then i don't see why this wouldn't work here.

What are your thoughts on this? Should we get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion?

 

[Bevan Price]

Many TOCs seem to think that everyone who makes a mistake with the fiendishly complicated ticketing system is a criminal trying to defraud the railways. Likewise, when people have been unable to buy a ticket for reasons that are often the fault of "the railway" (e.g. insufficient ticket office staff; poorly designed or not working ticket machines, etc.).

I think there needs to be a change in that sort of attitude, and allow people to buy tickets on trains, or at destinations to buy tickets without penalties.

But, equally, genuine fraudsters / fare evaders need to be deterred and penalised where appropriate. Perhaps some ticket checking staff need extra training in how to deal with people and in how to assess whether they are "genuine mistakes" or "deliberate evaders", rather than have a universal rule that penalises everyone.

 

[swt_passenger]

So in your railway, anyone who travels on a non stop service to their regular destination will never need to pay, just as long as they are happy to get put off the train at their stop. That’ll work well.

 

[jon0844]

That would be the day that everyone would stop paying. Free travel for all!

 

[Kite159]

So for Mr X who is travelling between two close by unbarriered stations (lets say 15 minutes journey time) where there is no off-peak day return fares, only anytime day singles/returns, if there was no threat of paying extra in the form of a penalty fare or a trip to court, why would he bother buying a ticket? The worse that can happen is getting gripped by the guard and getting made to pay the £6 fare, on those days the train is too busy/guard doesn't get to him hey it's a free trip.

 

[Bantamzen]

As others have already articulated, this idea would just open up a free-for-all and more & more passengers would just chance it. Passenger numbers might actually rise as a result, but revenue will plummet & before long the TOCs will be beating a hasty retreat leaving the DfT to pick up the pieces & invariably start to close down services & lines as costs don't get covered.

In short, no we should not get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion. What we should ensure is that in those occasions where people are unable to pay for the correct ticket before being challenged by RPOs are given an opportunity to either reverse the decision there and then, or claim back from the TOCs. Of course each case would have to be taken on its merit, there are plenty of people who legitimately get caught & still try to wriggle out of a PF or fine. Sadly this is the nature of our society today.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Keep PFs, keep prosecutions for a fraud charge for serious matters like wilful falsification, but get rid of Byelaw 18 and the RoRA parts relating to ticket fraud. The railway is too irresponsible to use them, and ScotRail seems to manage without general recourse to private prosecution as Scottish law makes them very difficult to conduct to the point that you almost never get them.

Let the railway sue for unpaid monies like any other business.

 

[Calthrop]

As others have already articulated, this idea would just open up a free-for-all and more & more passengers would just chance it. Passenger numbers might actually rise as a result, but revenue will plummet & before long the TOCs will be beating a hasty retreat leaving the DfT to pick up the pieces & invariably start to close down services & lines as costs don't get covered.

In short, no we should not get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion. What we should ensure is that in those occasions where people are unable to pay for the correct ticket before being challenged by RPOs are given an opportunity to either reverse the decision there and then, or claim back from the TOCs. Of course each case would have to be taken on its merit, there are plenty of people who legitimately get caught & still try to wriggle out of a PF or fine. Sadly this is the nature of our society today.

(My bolding) -- perhaps I'm being a Pollyanna here; but I'm wary of coming to conclusions to the effect of "the country / world is going to the dogs", in contrast with some time in the past when greater virtue supposedly obtained. It would appear to me that many people have always tended toward dishonesty, and to getting away with what they can, when they can. I love the case from about a century ago, of the gentleman who ended up in court, over the special deal offered by whichever railway company it was -- the Great Northern? -- for a particular kind of "season ticket" whose purchase gave the holder, x return journeys per year between London and the West Riding of Yorkshire. It emerged that for years, he had been using very skilfully forged copies of this ticket, to defraud the railway company of his payment to them for same: he'd come unstuck one day, when a particularly alert ticket inspector spotted something not quite right. The best of the tale is, that the guy was a zealous lay preacher, whose trips to Yorkshire were for the purpose of preaching the Gospel there. It would seem that he didn't properly have down, the "render unto Caesar" bit...

 

[Bantamzen]

(My bolding) -- perhaps I'm being a Pollyanna here; but I'm wary of coming to conclusions to the effect of "the country / world is going to the dogs", in contrast with some time in the past when greater virtue supposedly obtained. It would appear to me that many people have always tended toward dishonesty, and to getting away with what they can, when they can. I love the case from about a century ago, of the gentleman who ended up in court, over the special deal offered by whichever railway company it was -- the Great Northern? -- for a particular kind of "season ticket" whose purchase gave the holder, x return journeys per year between London and the West Riding of Yorkshire. It emerged that for years, he had been using very skilfully forged copies of this ticket, to defraud the railway company of his payment to them for same: he'd come unstuck one day, when a particularly alert ticket inspector spotted something not quite right. The best of the tale is, that the guy was a zealous lay preacher, whose trips to Yorkshire were for the purpose of preaching the Gospel there. It would seem that he didn't properly have down, the "render unto Caesar" bit...

I will readily admit my last post was based on my own perceptions. So maybe I need to change the sentence to "Sadly that is the nature of our society". I think we could probably agree that given half the chance, as could happen in the scenario suggested by the OP, more & more people would chance it. What is different about today's society is how quickly these messages can spread. So instead of word of mouth, the chancers could just blaze their suggestions on getting free rides to literally millions in little or no time across social media.

 

[Calthrop]

I will readily admit my last post was based on my own perceptions. So maybe I need to change the sentence to "Sadly that is the nature of our society". I think we could probably agree that given half the chance, as could happen in the scenario suggested by the OP, more & more people would chance it. What is different about today's society is how quickly these messages can spread. So instead of word of mouth, the chancers could just blaze their suggestions on getting free rides to literally millions in little or no time across social media.

I take your point here -- am on the elderly side, and tend often to overlook social media and its ubiquity, and what it can do. For sure, human nature is such that it would be no use looking for a vigorous counter-campaign on social media, conducted by the righteous, encouraging people to resist fare-dodging temptation and do the honest thing !

 

[Clip]

When everyone starts paying their correct fare for their journey then we can look at it - until then, no.

 

[jon0844]

It might work in Japan, but we don't have the culture here to rely on honesty. People of ALL ages will try it on, and everything from TV, music, social media and so on encourages people to break the rules to get what they want, and not be told what to do do. Don't take notice of authority. It's all quite sad and depressing.

One issue that is valid is that those who are honest and make a mistake can stand to be punished more than the person who refuses to cooperate, gives a fake name, or pushes through a barrier/staff and walks out. With the likelihood of BTP being around being slim, and usually the police are only interested in someone giving a name and address (so won't detain someone even if it's quite likely the details are fake), the habitual fare evaders are often able to carry on with impunity.

Sure, every now and then some come unstuck but I am sure it's a minority.

 

[MarkyT]

... the habitual fare evaders are often able to carry on with impunity.
Sure, every now and then some come unstuck but I am sure it's a minority.

Sociopathic habitual fraudsters don't particularly worry if they get caught. Unless they're identified, the odd penalty fare is nothing compared to their savings over the longer term, and they don't care about being shamed in public when caught either, unlike genuine poorer mistake makers who can get comparatively seriously penalised financially at the same time as losing face in front of fellow passengers under pressure of an oppressively officious revenue officer who (to be fair) is likely to be conditioned to be often dealing with the former class of individual. Some people might get seriously anxious or depressed under such a scenario.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It might work in Japan, but we don't have the culture here to rely on honesty.

Scotland isn't exactly the heart of honesty of the UK (I very much doubt your average Glaswegian "ned" is in a hurry to be parted from his proceeds from handling stolen goods etc), yet most of its lines do not have PFs (some do) and they do not have the ability to prosecute to any meaningful extent.

They protect revenue by more active means - ticket barriers and sufficient on-board staff to conduct checks.

 

[jon0844]

They protect revenue by more active means - ticket barriers and sufficient on-board staff to conduct checks.

Is it really effective though? Ever seen people push through gates with impunity? I have - of all ages I might add. And doubling up is extremely common at many stations too - especially the newer, slower, gatelines that seem to open and close with a lot less pressure. I recall a large group who all doubled up with people to get into Tottenham Hale underground, and staff quite wisely watched and said nothing at the time. As said above by MarkyT, they didn't care. Gates are no real barrier to anyone determined enough. Double up, push through or even slide under (another thing I've personally seen a few times).

On a train, a train manager could put you off at the next stop and get BTP to assist, so some routes may be a little easier to protect than DOO trains, the tube etc. I do wonder how, to continue on from the mention of the Glaswegian 'ned' the totally staff-free subway will do in this regard?

More active means would suggest giving additional powers/training to staff, which no TOC or union is likely to go for. If you could physically detain someone, or we had compulsory ID, then maybe things could be done differently. Until then, those who have no respect for authority seem to do quite well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The subway won't be totally staff-free, as the law requires underground stations to be staffed with at least one member of staff for fire safety reasons, since the Kings Cross fire. Germany does have totally unstaffed underground stations, but for that reason the UK cannot.

All they are doing is removing the drivers, who have no revenue role anyway; revenue protection is primarily station-based like it is[1] on the Tube. It hasn't had guards for years.

[1] I got inspected on board the Tube once ever. I suspect they couldn't do it now due to Contactless.

 

[jon0844]

The subway won't be totally staff-free, as the law requires underground stations to be staffed with at least one member of staff for fire safety reasons, since the Kings Cross fire. Germany does have totally unstaffed underground stations, but for that reason the UK cannot.

All they are doing is removing the drivers, who have no revenue role anyway.

Fair enough. I thought they were doing away with visible staff and relying more on sensors/remote monitoring. But if there's only ever one member of staff, let's assume they won't be involved in revenue protection much.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fair enough. I thought they were doing away with visible staff and relying more on sensors/remote monitoring. But if there's only ever one member of staff, let's assume they won't be involved in revenue protection much.

I don't believe they are making any change to the number of station staff from the present situation. The automation is simply about removing the drivers. The law requires at least one, that's all, so they can't zero it.

 

[jon0844]

I don't believe they are making any change to the number of station staff from the present situation. The automation is simply about removing the drivers. The law requires at least one, that's all, so they can't zero it.

That's reassuring. But I do think we have a problem with fare evasion, and it comes more down to dealing with serious offenders. The 'don't get involved and put yourself in danger' approach is obvious, but also encourages it.

More frequent push backs with police assistance are perhaps a good move, but are expensive and there are limited resources to do these. Often when there are blocks, other stations are left open as a consequence.

I've travelled with people phoning ahead to see if the gates were open from the people they're going to see. This makes it hard to even randomise blocks.

 

[Deerfold]

The subway won't be totally staff-free, as the law requires underground stations to be staffed with at least one member of staff for fire safety reasons, since the Kings Cross fire. Germany does have totally unstaffed underground stations, but for that reason the UK cannot.

All they are doing is removing the drivers, who have no revenue role anyway; revenue protection is primarily station-based like it is[1] on the Tube. It hasn't had guards for years.

[1] I got inspected on board the Tube once ever. I suspect they couldn't do it now due to Contactless.

I too was inspected once on board the tube (I worked in London for 14 years) - it would have been between 2001 and 2003. Contactless doesn't stop inspections - they happen on board buses and trains - though any penalty on trains is applied in retrospect.

 

[jon0844]

I think I've had one check on a bus, one on a tube train and a few times exiting King's Cross and Farringdon (when using a Gold Card, so it was triggered to flag up and I was asked to show my photo card).

In around 19 years of travel into London, I'd say the checks are rather too infrequent to really put people off taking a chance.. although TfL do seem to be quite proactive in going to court than out of court settlements.

 

[geoffk]

Is it really effective though? Ever seen people push through gates with impunity? I have - of all ages I might add. And doubling up is extremely common at many stations too - especially the newer, slower, gatelines that seem to open and close with a lot less pressure. I recall a large group who all doubled up with people to get into Tottenham Hale underground, and staff quite wisely watched and said nothing at the time. As said above by MarkyT, they didn't care. Gates are no real barrier to anyone determined enough. Double up, push through or even slide under (another thing I've personally seen a few times).

On a train, a train manager could put you off at the next stop and get BTP to assist, so some routes may be a little easier to protect than DOO trains, the tube etc. I do wonder how, to continue on from the mention of the Glaswegian 'ned' the totally staff-free subway will do in this regard?

More active means would suggest giving additional powers/training to staff, which no TOC or union is likely to go for. If you could physically detain someone, or we had compulsory ID, then maybe things could be done differently. Until then, those who have no respect for authority seem to do quite well.

How did we manage all those years with open stations? (and our continental neighbours still have them). Were we more honest then or were ticket checks on the train more rigorous?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How did we manage all those years with open stations? (and our continental neighbours still have them). Were we more honest then or were ticket checks on the train more rigorous?

The regional network was much quieter in the 1990s which was the height of the "open station" thing, and it was generally realistic for the guard (plus a TTE, possibly) to get to everyone on, say, a 2 car Pacer knocking around the North West. The old ticketing equipment (PORTIS/SPORTIS) was also much quicker than the present equipment with a skilled operator.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I too was inspected once on board the tube (I worked in London for 14 years) - it would have been between 2001 and 2003. Contactless doesn't stop inspections - they happen on board buses and trains - though any penalty on trains is applied in retrospect.

Mine would have been about then too. Maybe they did a spate of them around then.

I've had an attempt to PF me on a bus when I had touched in, notably. It seems what had happened was that the driver had pulled up to the stop at Euston (it was a 68 starting there) with the ticket machine still logged into the previous journey, so the touch-in was deleted when he logged it into the correct one.

I suspect it might have shown up differently to the inspector now we have the Hopper fare.

 

[30907]

How did we manage all those years with open stations? (and our continental neighbours still have them). Were we more honest then or were ticket checks on the train more rigorous?

Open stations were unheard of before the 70s, apart from a handful of paytrain lines from the 60s - if there was no ticket collector at a particular station, guards did the job. But people still got away with it, especially in non-corridor territory, and ticket checks on-train weren't common (on the SR at least!)

 

[Antman]

Should we get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion in the UK and if someone doesn't have a ticket when checked then they either have to buy one or get off at the next stop if they refuse? Isn't the current penalty fares and prosecutions system a complete failure?

All that our current system does it target the honest people who have made honest mistakes while the real fare evaders always get away.

When the real fare evaders get caught by RPIs they will simply just refuse to pay or give any details or they will just walk off the train or they will get aggressive and threaten the RPIs so they always just get away with it.

Where as the honest people who have made honest mistakes (such as thinking they can buy a ticket onboard or buying the wrong ticket or travelling on the wrong train or travelling on the wrong route etc etc etc) are the ones that will always pay and give their details. So these are the people who always end up unfairly getting caught out.

And then we have the ridiculous system where on the some trains if you are caught by a Guard then you can just buy a ticket but if you are caught by an RPI then they can give you a penalty fare or prosecute you. So there is no consistency either.

In many countries in Mainland Europe they don't have any penalty fares or prosecutions in place. If you don't have a ticket when checked then they simply make you purchase one onboard. If you refuse to buy one then they just make you get off at the next stop. This seems like a much more fair system. If this works in these countries then i don't see why this wouldn't work here.

What are your thoughts on this? Should we get rid of penalty fares and prosecutions for fare evasion?

I think you're spot on about penalty fares, the compliant law abiding citizen who has made an innocent mistake gets the book thrown at them whilst the aggressive fare dodger who had no intention of paying gets away with it because they're too much trouble for revenue staff to deal with.

However if passengers are only required to pay up if and when they are asked it does rather encourage fare evasion.

I don't know what the solution is but it's certainly not the current penalty fare system.

 

[Deerfold]

How did we manage all those years with open stations? (and our continental neighbours still have them). Were we more honest then or were ticket checks on the train more rigorous?

I was a regular traveler from Sowerby Bridge to Bradford. Many people paid at the station with SaverStrip tickets which just needed clipping in a (fairly) cheap machine on each platform giving a 10% discount on single tickets. It was unusual not to be checked on the journey but few people were buying tickets on the day. There were manual checks at the exit at Bradford (and Leeds) but most other stations on the line were unmanned or at least had no checks.

I've had an attempt to PF me on a bus when I had touched in, notably. It seems what had happened was that the driver had pulled up to the stop at Euston (it was a 68 starting there) with the ticket machine still logged into the previous journey, so the touch-in was deleted when he logged it into the correct one.

I suspect it might have shown up differently to the inspector now we have the Hopper fare.

From what I know about them, yes if you were on Oyster, not if you were on Contactless - on either your card would not have showed up on the list of touched-in cards, but the Oyster would have had details of the previous touch in when checked (which it would have had anyway) so might have been subject to a goodwill gesture without further checks.