Am I correct in assuming that split ticketing is only available where there are at least 2 different trains that go from A-C? For example, one train that stops at A, B and C (stopper) and another that only stops at A and C (fast)
That is one scenario, but there are many others where it can be cheaper. Sometimes it can be as simple as the availability of Advances varying between different sections of a journey - if you buy one Advance, you pay the cost of the dearest tier for all of your journey. By splitting, you can take advantage of cheaper tiers of Advance that might be available for part of the journey.
Therefore, I agree that it is fare evasion, but only if you use them incorrectly, i.e. you have purchased a split ticket for the stopper train but you actually get on the fast train. Your ticket would not be valid on the fast train, and it would specify “valid only on trains that stop at B” or “valid only on (TOC) services”.
Travelling through your split point non-stop is sometimes permissible - it depends on the kinds of tickets you hold. Doing so where not permitted could be argued as fare evasion, but it will be highly situation dependent.
If a ticket inspector scans this ticket, it will flag up to them that the ticket is not valid on this train and then the holder of the ticket would either have to purchase a new ticket or receive a penalty fare, or may even have their details taken for the TOC to then write to them later on.
Not necessarily. I don't think ticket scanning systems are smart enough to work out whether a particular ticket is valid route-wise for the train in question - that is left up to the member of staff. Generally the scan there to check that the ticket is in date and flag any Railcard discount applied, as well as ensuring that a ticket can't be refunded (or at least, not unless there are exceptional circumstances).
Passed through many, many TfW stations last week and all had at least one "Don't Get Caught Red Handed" poster displayed if not more.
The same poster also appears on each of their PDF timetable leaflets can't really miss the information. TfW are certainly getting the message across.
Indeed and this is exactly the kind of poster that I think should be clearly on display at the entrance to every station where operators use private prosecutions. Of course it needs to be correctly worded - ISTR that ATW or TfW had a poster that claimed you must actively seek out the guard if you couldn't buy a ticket before boarding, which isn't true.
Why people see defrauding the railway as any different to shop lifting is beyond me. Perhaps it is how people are brought up? Or previous life experiences? My parents and grandparents owned a couple of shops I was fully away of the consequences of shoplifting to the business' commercial viability. - Besides I was always told as a child stealing is wrong be a physical item or a service such as transport.
I suppose there are a few factors.
Firstly, with a shop, it's entirely clear where and how you should pay - at the checkout, before you leave the shop. There's no ambiguity about it. Contrast that with the railway - sometimes it is officially permitted to board without a ticket, other times it's not permitted but is
de facto encouraged by members of staff selling tickets onboard/at the destination without giving any warning, and then occasionally there are crackdowns. It's a very inconsistent policy and message to get across. Imagine if there were different types of shops and in some, you were deemed as shoplifting for taking an item off the shelf without having paid a deposit when entering the store. It would cause no end of confusion.
Secondly, when you steal goods from a shop, you are depriving them of a physical piece of property, which means they cannot sell that to another customer. It's a quite tangible loss. Whereas on the railway - the train would run whether or not you board it, let alone buy a ticket. And unless there is exceptional overcrowding, you aren't depriving the railway of the ability to sell their services to anyone else. So many see it as a victimless crime. Of course there is still the financial loss, but it is intangible.
BUT from time to time there are postings here where one can almost sense someone HAS made a genuine mistake. It must be very difficult for someone who has acted with good intent to find themselves on the wrong side of the railway bye-laws with no body on the railway believing them. Yes I know some try it on - but people in customer facing roles should be able to detect the genuine from the deliberate.
Your example below perfectly illustrates how people can make a genuine mistake. Ultimately it's very difficult, if not impossible, to tell those who have made a genuine mistake from those who are deliberate. The railway's response to this is effectively to consider everyone as a fare evader until proven otherwise - hence the absolute Byelaw 18 offence. Whilst that is arguably applied with discretion, the mere fact it's on the books is highly problematic in my view.
