Can a ticket clerk give permission to board train without ticket

[Watershed]

If you were nicked outside Tesco with a bottle of wine you hadn’t paid for would saying “the man in the shop said I could take it” really cut the mustard?

But that would be so unlikely an event (or excuse) that it can effectively be discounted. Plus there would almost certainly be CCTV that can be checked, there and then, to determine the matter one way or another.

Meanwhile there are legitimate reasons why you might travel without having bought a ticket. But as you would be checked on the train or at the destination, it's harder to speak to a member of staff at the origin station to determine the veracity of an account.

 

[43066]

Is there a byelaw stating that no offence is committed if an authorised person gives the passenger permission to take goods without payment?

If the answer is "no" then it's another example of an analogy that doesn't quite work, to add to the (very long) list!

In fact any analogies between railway ticketing and supermarket shopping have no value (apart from for amusement or perhaps moralistic purposes)

Well *if that’s what actually happened* - the analogy still *sort of* works (although I concede it isn’t perfect). If a Tesco employee really had given you permission to take a bottle of wine for free, no theft act offence would have been committed.

But looking at this situation from the point of view of the person doing the reporting/prosecuting: “The man at the station told me I could travel” is offered as an excuse: “okay let’s report for prosecution and you can explain that to the magistrate” would seem a logical approach?

But that would be so unlikely an event (or excuse) that it can effectively be discounted. Plus there would almost certainly be CCTV that can be checked, there and then, to determine the matter one way or another.

The issue there is that CCTV often doesn’t record sound.

A good example - I was leaning out of my cab door the other day and someone asked if they could use their ticket on my train. I had no idea and it’s not my place to advise on these issues so I responded: “you’ll have to ask the guard” and they jumped on board anyway. I have no idea what happened next. If asked later I would certainly state I hadn’t given them permission.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2022 ==

Meanwhile there are legitimate reasons why you might travel without having bought a ticket. But as you would be checked on the train or at the destination, it's harder to speak to a member of staff at the origin station to determine the veracity of an account.

This would be along the lines of the “escaping domestic violence” type scenario? If someone is genuinely suspected of being trafficked or are obviously confused, mentally ill or similar then they tend to be dealt with differently. In fact we had BTP to my train for a welfare issue just the other day. These cases seem few and far between and I suspect most RPIs can spot them a mile off.

If a welfare issue was suspected it’s also vanishingly unlikely any member of staff would simply say: “jump on this train and pay later”, so I doubt that scenario would ever apply in this context?

 

[yorkie]

Well *if that’s what actually happened* - the analogy still *sort of* works (although I concede it isn’t perfect). If a Tesco employee really had given you permission to take a bottle of wine for free, no theft act offence would have been committed.

But looking at this situation from the point of view of the person doing the reporting/prosecuting: “The man at the station told me I could travel” is offered as an excuse: “okay let’s report for prosecution and you can explain that to the magistrate” would seem a logical approach?

But the analogy falls down because there are all sorts of legitimate scenarios where someone would be authorised to travel (or board a train) without a ticket.

There is no equivalent in supermarkets; the nearest equivalent may be there being problems with a car park machine and car owners being authorised to enter or leave the car park without charge.

The issue there is that CCTV often doesn’t record sound.

A good example - I was leaning out of my cab door the other day and someone asked if they could use their ticket on my train. I had no idea and it’s not my place to advise on these issues so I responded: “you’ll have to ask the guard” and they jumped on board anyway. I have no idea what happened next. If asked later I would certainly state I hadn’t given them permission.

That matter would then be for the courts to decide.

This would be along the lines of the “escaping domestic violence” type scenario? If someone is genuinely suspected of being trafficked or are obviously confused, mentally ill or similar then they tend to be dealt with differently. In fact we had BTP to my train for a welfare issue just the other day. These cases seem few and far between and I suspect most RPIs can spot them a mile off.

Maybe, as well as problems with ticket issuing facilities. Or the customer may be an employee at Network Rail or another TOC; permission for rail staff to travel free happens on a regular basis all over the network. No offence is committed.

 

[AlterEgo]

As always, your rights, especially around low-value and low-trust transactions, are much less relevant than your ability to enforce upon them.

 

[43066]

even if you have been given permission, a rogue RPI can come along and a prosecution may well succeed.

I suppose the system assumes that the *vast* majority of times this occurs, it’ll be a scally trying it on. Unfortunately human nature is such that the system is correct in that assumption!

The cases reported for prosecution are backed up by PACE compliant interviews, very often accompanied by CCTV and body cam evidence (the latter does contain audio). Not to discount the possibility of a rogue RPI but, if all they’ve done is refer a case for prosecution based on the evidence
before them, surely that’s just doing their job?

If the RPI was found to have lied or fabricated evidence they’d be facing not only dismissal but potential prosecution for perverting the course of justice. It’s not impossible but difficult to see what they’d have to gain, and highly unlikely they’d get away with it, especially these days.

But the analogy falls down because there are all sorts of legitimate scenarios where someone would be authorised to travel (or board a train) without a ticket.

There is no equivalent in supermarkets; the nearest equivalent may be there being problems with a car park machine and car owners being authorised to enter or leave the car park without charge.

The example isn’t perfect - but it’s another situation where someone has prima facie committed a dishonesty offence, to which there might be a limited number of defences. “I believed the bottle of wine was a free gift”, “the man in the shop told me I could have it”, “I thought I’d scanned it at the self service checkout, but now see I hadn’t” etc. If you were found with a product you hadn’t paid for, you could offer those explanations, but would likely be prosecuted and it would then fall to you to mount a defence.

Applying this to the railway scenario: take my local station for example. It’s a penalty fare area so, if you’re found on board a train without a ticket, that’s a prima facie offence. There are some limited circumstances where being on board a train without a ticket might be legitimate. But the reason being offered up in our example isn’t “I’m being trafficked” it’s simply: “the man at the station told me I could travel”.

As an RPI would you accept that at face value? You might conduct an initial enquiry (say calling to check with the ticket office) but, if that drew a blank, surely it would be correct to report for prosecution in most cases?

Ultimately an RPI is there to fact find
and gather evidence, not to decide on guilt of innocence.

That matter would then be for the courts to decide.

I suspect most of these “edge cases” are.

Maybe, as well as problems with ticket issuing facilities. Or the customer may be an employee at Network Rail or another TOC; permission for rail staff to travel free happens on a regular basis all over the network. No offence is committed.

Issues with ticketing facilities “ticket office was closed”, “no machine” etc.
can be easily checked.

Staff travel is an interesting one. As a staff member if you ever find yourself being questioned by revenue you will be in very hot water indeed. You can of course ask permission to travel from guards but you should do this overtly and straight away on boarding or you’re risking it. No way I’d chance it asking to be let through a gateline and getting onto a DOO train. I generally don’t even bother on guarded trains for fear of the guard being relieved en route and not mentioning to his relief etc.

Much easier just to buy a priv!

 

[farleigh]

It isn’t a “customer service” issue, as such, because a criminal offence has, prima facie, been committed. Otherwise everyone trying it on would say “so and so gave me permission”.

If you were nicked outside Tesco, with a bottle of wine you hadn’t paid for, would saying: “the man in the shop said I could take it” really cut the mustard?

This analogy is no use.

Also, a criminal offence has not been committed at all if permission was given.

 

[pedr]

Because of the way magistrates’ court evidence and burdens of proof work, it appears that it is the responsibility of the defendant to prove that it is more likely than not that an authorised person provided them with permission to board a train without a valid ticket (etc). So since the practical question is ‘am I liable to be convicted if prosecuted?’ rather than the more abstract ‘am I committing an offence?’ it would seem wise to ensure you have sufficient evidence to show that prior to boarding.

I think that’s an entirely unsatisfactory state for the law to be in, but that’s not much help to someone faced with this problem.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Supermarkets do give away free stuff for a lot of reasons. But there are two key differences to the railway. Firstly they'll give you some form of proof, be it a voucher, receipt, letter, etc or, failing that, they'll tell security so they're aware. Secondly a supermarket won't accuse you of stealing it if they haven't seen you take it. Just being outside the shop with it isn't good enough. They must have seen you actually take it.
So the railways would need to give you proof and have seen you willfully not buying a ticket (not sure how that would be possible) for the analogy to work.

 

[L401CJF]

Im a guard, on several occasions where people have been given permission to board, I have been informed by platform staff (at larger stations).

I did have a team of TIL revenue staff onboard my train the other week, following me around doing my revenue. They weren't issuing penalties etc but were lecturing people on buy before you board. Got to a particular station and had to sell all who boarded tickets as the TVM wasnt working - this is true as we have had daily emails about it for a few weeks now - they all still got lectured on buy before you board despite the machine not working and all clearly not intent on avoiding to pay. I explained to the revenue bunch the TVM wasnt working and to give them a break. Fell on deaf ears. TIL were only going another 2 stops so I decided to abandon retail duties and catch up on my delay reporting in the back until they got off. I wouldnt mind half as much but the TVMs at these stations are card only. We dont do promise to pay etc and everybody paid cash - so I still dont see why they need a lecture off revenue!

On the odd occasion I give somebody permission to travel other than what is stated on their ticket, I print an itinerary out for them and sign it with my company, pay number and headcode. I have come across others onboard my train who have presented similar.

 

[spag23]

An obvious solution would be to whip your iphone out and film the man giving you permission. Unlike BodyCams (apparently) this will have the sound, as well as identifying the permission giver.

 

[Haywain]

When (if) you happen to be in this position, just ask for the name of the person telling you, then it's not 'the man on the platform' but a identifiable member of staff.

 

[Hadders]

Im a guard, on several occasions where people have been given permission to board, I have been informed by platform staff (at larger stations).

I did have a team of TIL revenue staff onboard my train the other week, following me around doing my revenue. They weren't issuing penalties etc but were lecturing people on buy before you board. Got to a particular station and had to sell all who boarded tickets as the TVM wasnt working - this is true as we have had daily emails about it for a few weeks now - they all still got lectured on buy before you board despite the machine not working and all clearly not intent on avoiding to pay. I explained to the revenue bunch the TVM wasnt working and to give them a break. Fell on deaf ears. TIL were only going another 2 stops so I decided to abandon retail duties and catch up on my delay reporting in the back until they got off. I wouldnt mind half as much but the TVMs at these stations are card only. We dont do promise to pay etc and everybody paid cash - so I still dont see why they need a lecture off revenue!

On the odd occasion I give somebody permission to travel other than what is stated on their ticket, I print an itinerary out for them and sign it with my company, pay number and headcode. I have come across others onboard my train who have presented similar.

I’d have been tempted to throw the TIL inspectors off your train for behaving in that fashion.

 

[spag23]

When (if) you happen to be in this position, just ask for the name of the person telling you, then it's not 'the man on the platform' but a identifiable member of staff.

Yeah but.. when push comes to shove (perhaps weeks later), the man could have "forgotten" the exchange, or even denied it. Perhaps claiming the passenger had merely clocked the his name badge. IMHO there's nothing like actual footage.

 

[Huntergreed]

Yeah but.. when push comes to shove (perhaps weeks later), the man could have "forgotten" the exchange, or even denied it. Perhaps claiming the passenger had merely clocked the his name badge. IMHO there's nothing like actual footage.

For the “ordinary” passenger, is it really reasonable to expect them to go to such lengths simply to avoid accusations by overtly harsh revenue inspectors?

As far as a normal customer is concerned, provided they have been told they can travel, they will do so. They certainly don’t expect to be hammered with a prosecution later on, and the system (while effective for preventing fare evasion) is far too harsh in this respect.

 

[Haywain]

avoid accusations by overtly harsh revenue inspectors?

In general terms, it's somewhere between pretty unusual and very rare to come across revenue inspectors. It looks worse on here because there's a lot of cases in the Disputes and Prosecutions section. For all this to arise you've got to first get stuck behind someone taking a while at the ticket office, then have the member of staff tell you to board the train without a ticket, and then not see the guard to buy a ticket before you encounter a revenue inspector who chooses not to believe that you've been told to board the train. A cursory inspection of the threads on the D&P section will show that such cases do not crop up very often, if at all.

 

[spag23]

For the “ordinary” passenger, is it really reasonable to expect them to go to such lengths simply to avoid accusations by overtly harsh revenue inspectors?

As far as a normal customer is concerned, provided they have been told they can travel, they will do so. They certainly don’t expect to be hammered with a prosecution later on, and the system (while effective for preventing fare evasion) is far too harsh in this respect.

Agreed. But that's because the "ordinary" passenger won't have read the horror stories on this forum. Personally I'd now always video the permission giver.
In view of the spread of mobile phones, perhaps the TOCs could even recommend and publicise this action. Why not? This would save them issuing so many PFs and settlements.
Aha. That's why not!

 

[Watershed]

In general terms, it's somewhere between pretty unusual and very rare to come across revenue inspectors. It looks worse on here because there's a lot of cases in the Disputes and Prosecutions section. For all this to arise you've got to first get stuck behind someone taking a while at the ticket office, then have the member of staff tell you to board the train without a ticket, and then not see the guard to buy a ticket before you encounter a revenue inspector who chooses not to believe that you've been told to board the train. A cursory inspection of the threads on the D&P section will show that such cases do not crop up very often, if at all.

That particular scenario might not be reported on this forum too often - but we have heard variants of it involving other abuses of TOCs' powers often enough to know that the current setup is tilted ridiculously in the TOCs' favour. Proper safeguards are needed if private prosecutions are to maintain any pretence of being just.

 

[Hadders]

At the (sadly now closed LNER Stevenage Travel Centre) I've reguarly used to see the clerks authroising trave on a different train. They'd stamp the rear of the ticket with their branch stamp and write the details on the endorsements box.

That's how it should be done!

 

[Haywain]

At the (sadly now closed LNER Stevenage Travel Centre) I've reguarly used to see the clerks authroising trave on a different train. They'd stamp the rear of the ticket with their branch stamp and write the details on the endorsements box.

That's how it should be done!

All very well, but if you've time to do that you've time to sell a ticket.

 

[Doppelganger]

All very well, but if you've time to do that you've time to sell a ticket.

Stamping the back of something is as quick as selling a ticket?

If that's the logic, we should never see a queue at a ticket office.

 

[wellhouse]

Staff travel is an interesting one. As a staff member if you ever find yourself being questioned by revenue you will be in very hot water indeed. You can of course ask permission to travel from guards but you should do this overtly and straight away on boarding or you’re risking it. No way I’d chance it asking to be let through a gateline and getting onto a DOO train. I generally don’t even bother on guarded trains for fear of the guard being relieved en route and not mentioning to his relief etc.

Much easier just to buy a priv!

Staff travel is indeed an interesting issue.

The management staff responsible for ticketing policy and revenue protection probably enjoy travel concessions that expose them to many of the issues regular passengers endure (cancellation, delay, overcrowding, uncomfortable seats...) but they never experience any of the ticketing issues, such as queuing, routeing, validity, authorisation to board without a ticket, and so on.

I suggest that is a significant factor in the unsatisfactory service so many of us encounter from time to time

 

[Haywain]

Stamping the back of something is as quick as selling a ticket?

What I replied to was this:

They'd stamp the rear of the ticket with their branch stamp and write the details on the endorsements box.

So, not just stamping the ticket. And then there's establishing why you would need to do it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jul 2022 ==

they never experience any of the ticketing issues, such as queuing, routeing, validity, authorisation to board without a ticket, and so on.

The number of rail staff, even at fairly senior levels, who enjoy nationwide free travel is relatively small, and reducing year on year. Rail staff have had the ability to buy online for only a matter of months - prior to that it was only possible at ticket offices so it is wrong to suggest that they don't experience queueing and all the rest.

 

[L401CJF]

I’d have been tempted to throw the TIL inspectors off your train for behaving in that fashion.

Being pretty new I wasn't quite brave enough to.. although I did argue that they were being unfair in the circumstances. I have decided should similar happen again I'll be telling them to leave me to it.

This is the first time they have followed me around whilst travelling to a location, they normally just sit down and let me know they're there should I need them for assistance.

 

[dcbwhaley]

That matter would then be for the courts to decide.

Do you really think that it is good customer service for a customer to end up in front of a magistrate after following the instructions of a company employee? An instruction that was only necessary because the employer was unable to do his job properly because of under-staffing

 

[43066]

This analogy is no use.

I’ve clarified the reasons why it’s somewhat relevant further, above. Feel free to challenge what you disagree with.

Also, a criminal offence has not been committed at all if permission was given.

But that’s the point - whether this is actually true or not won’t be known to the RPI doing the evidence gathering.

Because of the way magistrates’ court evidence and burdens of proof work, it appears that it is the responsibility of the defendant to prove that it is more likely than not that an authorised person provided them with permission to board a train without a valid ticket (etc). So since the practical question is ‘am I liable to be convicted if prosecuted?’ rather than the more abstract ‘am I committing an offence?’ it would seem wise to ensure you have sufficient evidence to show that prior to boarding.

Precisely.

Ultimately that’s no different to most other low level dishonesty matters being tried in a magistrates court. I get the sense people on here don’t think fare evasion should be a criminal matter at all, and that being challenged over not having a ticket is “bad customer service”.

I think there’s a misunderstanding of the roles of RPIs, who are merely evidence gatherers. They have discretion (often exercised!) but, if they do report, what happens next isn’t their decision. Whether the matter progresses turns on the TOCs prosecution team electing to proceed (which they will only do if they feel the evidence meets the appropriate threshold), and ultimately the accused will still get their “day in court”. Of course once revenue are interviewing you the “customer service” bit isn’t really relevant.

I think that’s an entirely unsatisfactory state for the law to be in, but that’s not much help to someone faced with this problem.

This somewhat overlooks that the overwhelming majority of passengers travel with valid tickets and never encounter any issues at all. The OPs position is also merely theoretical as the explanation was accepted.

I’d suggest most honest fare paying passengers would rather see stricter enforcement against ticketless travel which is a dishonesty matter, depriving the railway of revenue, and is indeed morally equivalent to low level theft.

My personal criticism of the system is that the most brazen offenders will often get away Scott free by simply running away or becoming threatening, so that evidence cannot be gathered. Lack of enforcement isn’t a valid reason for thinking the matter shouldn’t be criminal in the first place, though.

 

[dcbwhaley]

Ultimately that’s no different to most other low level dishonesty matters being tried in a magistrates court. I get the sense people on here don’t think fare evasion should be a criminal matter at all, and that being challenged over not having a ticket is “bad customer service”.

It should be a civil offence since it is a merely a form of trespass. And what is calling a customer a liar if not bad customer relations.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

It should be a civil offence since it is a merely a form of trespass. And what is calling a customer a liar if not bad customer relations.

I'll probably be pulled up by the parallel police here, but how is it 'merely a form of trespass '? If you sneak in to the theatre and enjoy the show without paying (i.e. receive a service without paying for it) is that just a form of trespass? If everyone does this, doesn't the management still have to pay the cast for putting on a show even though no tickets have been sold?

 

[AlterEgo]

If you sneak in to the theatre and enjoy the show without paying (i.e. receive a service without paying for it) is that just a form of trespass?

What else would it be, if you simply sneak in and don't pay?

 

[John Luxton]

What else would it be, if you simply sneak in and don't pay?

is it not Taking Pecunary Advantage?

I recall seeing a cases reported in the paper years ago with someone eating a meal in a restaurant ending up before magistrates for non payment and similarly for non paying taxi drivers. I quite distinctly recall the term being used as "taking pecunary advantage"

 

[AlterEgo]

is it not Taking Pecunary Advantage?

I recall seeing a cases reported in the paper years ago with someone eating a meal in a restaurant ending up before magistrates for non payment and similarly for non paying taxi drivers. I quite distinctly recall the term being used as "taking pecunary advantage"

Must have been a while ago as that is no longer an offence, replaced by the Fraud Act.