Does ‘the railway’ enjoy making things difficult for all its users?

[Bletchleyite]

I've been unsuccessful several years ago when trying to buy Family Railcard tickets when my sister in law had the Railcard (the children on it were gets so she was more likely to use it for local journeys, I was more likely to buy tickets to take her and my nephews away. I went home and bought them online.

I've tried (years ago) buying for others who did have Railcards and the booking office insisted I went and got them all (the Railcards, not the people), so along I went with a stack of Railcards which could have come from absolutely anywhere.

 

[The exile]

It is many years since I was in the fortunate position of holding a railcard and don’t remember it being such a problem to purchase a railcard discount without the card on me - though do remember being reminded I’d need it with me when I travel - which to me is the correct approach. Most of the comments I have read seem to assume that the purchaser is the person travelling. If I go to the ticket office to buy a ticket for my elderly, internet averse, hard of hearing mother - who has a railcard - do I have to present a railcard which for two reasons ;age and sex) is quite clearly not mine? Where’s the fraud prevention there - there’s no proof that the railcard owner will be the person travelling.
Incidentally-what would a ticket office say to an obvious adult who was buying a child advance ticket? (Lots of circumstances where that would be legitimate)

 

[6Gman]

Where in the UK are there trains but not buses? I almost always have to take a bus first before I can think about the train.

Berney Arms to Dyfi Junction?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Berney Arms to Dyfi Junction?

Via Altnabreac?

In all seriousness, with rural bus cuts as bad as they have been, most rural villages that have a station and aren't on the main road between two significant places probably have a rail service but not a bus service.

 

[6Gman]

Without a car I can only go around 80% of my region using a bus in fact it's quicker and more frequent than the few areas the train serves.
If I had the means and ability a boat would be better.

Porthmadog to Caernarfon (HQ of your local authority) is certainly a lot easier by bus than by train!

 

[ar10642]

Via Altnabreac?

In all seriousness, with rural bus cuts as bad as they have been, most rural villages that have a station and aren't on the main road between two significant places probably have a rail service but not a bus service.

Even if they do have a bus service, try getting one past 6PM or on a Sunday.

 

[Haywain]

For the more hardline ticket office staff on here, a couple of questions based on a hypothetical situation:

Hardline? Not me but I'll answer anyway.

I turn up at your ticket office asking to buy an off-peak return with Two Together railcard discount for outward travel today, for which the return portion is obviously valid within a calendar month.

You ask me to show the railcard. I pull a railcard out of my wallet. A picture of me and someone else, with an expiry date three weeks from now.

Do you require the other person on the railcard to present themselves at the ticket office?

No.

Do you refuse to sell the ticket, as it could be used outside the validity of the railcard?

I'll sell the ticket and make it clear that you need to make the return journey before the railcard expires, or renew the railcard.

 

[AM9]

Maybe a different approach could be adopted. How about the ticket software is modified to print a 'railcard not verified (at time of issue)' box. A similar indicator would be useful if the railcard's validity expired before that of the ticket, - only likely to affect open returns for up to 28/30 days. Then this box is automatically checked except where a valid railcard has been verified, normally booking office or travelling ticket issuer. That means that a visible mark in the box would alert any checker to request sight of the railcard. Similarly, a gateline scanner could also flash up a warning to the local attendant to assess whether a check was necessary. That would make the ticket checker's job easier.

 

[The exile]

Maybe a different approach could be adopted. How about the ticket software is modified to print a 'railcard not verified (at time of issue)' box. A similar indicator would be useful if the railcard's validity expired before that of the ticket, - only likely to affect open returns for up to 28/30 days. Then this box is automatically checked except where a valid railcard has been verified, normally booking office or travelling ticket issuer. That means that a visible mark in the box would alert any checker to request sight of the railcard. Similarly, a gateline scanner could also flash up a warning to the local attendant to assess whether a check was necessary. That would make the ticket checker's job easier.

You’d still have to show the railcard at ticket checks anyway (ticked or not) otherwise onecrailcard could be used to purchase multiple tickets - which is another reason why having to show a railcard at ticket offices is pointless!

 

[43066]

Indeed, but that's different, as it could create a situation where you can show the Priv at the time of booking but not the time of use.

The same analysis would apply if you were buying tickets for use after expiry of your current priv before you’d received the replacement. It’s difficult to imagine why you’d ever do this because priv (AFAIK) only applies to walk up fares so there would be no benefit to buying a long way in advance.

I'll sell the ticket and make it clear that you need to make the return journey before the railcard expires, or renew the railcard.

I hadn’t appreciated it had been said this wasn’t allowed upthread. So effectively there is discretion to allow the purchase if someone is buying a ticket for travel next week/next month v. that day, when you would expect them to have the relevant railcard on them. That makes complete sense.

 

[Scott1]

Surely the crucial word is MAY. You seem to read this as MUST and won't tolerate any deviation from this.
I spent many years working in retail at a well known supermarket, latterly as the store customer service manager. It was drilled into us, and we had to drill it into others, that there are only two rules of customer service. Rule 1-the customer is always right. Rule 2-when the customer is wrong, reread Rule 1. One Saturday we had a family returned from holiday come to do a massive shop to stock up again at home. It all went through the till and only then did they realise they hadn't got any payment. I let them take it home and come back to pay us later. Why? Because it's good customer service. We gained customers for life there, they told all their friends and family how good we were.
The sort of service you provide all you're get is "that grumpy bloke at the ticket office was a waste of space, I'll go by car" Railway staff are, often (but not always), clueless about customer service. I'd challenge you to work in real retail and not quit after the first day. You'd never manage it.

I stopped reading after this post. I did your job, in a large supermarket, and whilst you may have done this, if I or any of my team did they'd be looking for a new job, even if they did come back and pay!

 

[Haywain]

I hadn’t appreciated it had been said this wasn’t allowed upthread. So effectively there is discretion if someone is buying a ticket for travel next week/next month v.
that day.

I don't believe it's not allowed, so it's not discretion so much as a common sense approach to a grey area.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I stopped reading after this post. I did your job, in a large supermarket, and whilst you may have done this, if I or any of my team did they'd be looking for a new job, even if they did come back and pay!

I think it's a classic "it depends". We don't know what the supermarket was, but if it was something like Booths in one of the more prosperous and less "scally" rural Northern towns (or Waitrose in an equivalent Southern one), and the family was known to them, then I could see the sense in that. Rural towns and villages where everyone knows everyone are very different in that sort of regard than cities. Certainly it'd not surprise me to see a very rural Co-op agree to do that.

A less risky approach would be to agree to keep the trolleys for them so they could go and get payment, which is also less effort than putting it all back.

Asda in Skem, say? No chance.

 

[AM9]

You’d still have to show the railcard at ticket checks anyway (ticked or not) otherwise onecrailcard could be used to purchase multiple tickets - which is another reason why having to show a railcard at ticket offices is pointless!

For a multiple ticket like a Network/Two Together/Friends and Family and possibly Disabled Persons*, maybe, but I suspect that the single person and age differentiated cards are those most use to commit fraud.
* A person travelling as a carer on a Disabled Person's Railcard is likely to be travelling very close to the cardholder.

 

[Haywain]

A person travelling as a carer on a Disabled Person's Railcard is likely to be travelling very close to the cardholder.

There is no requirement for the second adult to be a carer, it is simply an "adult companion".

 

[The exile]

Take a pub for example - would you really expect the bar staff to take your word for it that you held a CAMRA discount and knock a percentage off the price of the drink without showing proof of it?

No, because the item to discounted is for immediate consumption - in exactly the same way as I wouldn’t consider it unreasonable for the ticket office at an unbarriered station to ask to see the railcard for a ticket valid for immediate travel. However, if the pyb is selling vouchers for a future event which are only valid if presented with a CAMRA card, I would expect the vendor to warn me I would need to show the card when using the voucher but sell me the vouchers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Aug 2022 ==

For a multiple ticket like a Network/Two Together/Friends and Family and possibly Disabled Persons*, maybe, but I suspect that the single person and age differentiated cards are those most use to commit fraud.
* A person travelling as a carer on a Disabled Person's Railcard is likely to be travelling very close to the cardholder.

Why? What’s the difference between me turning up at two different windows to buy two tickets for the same train on one railcard (which wouldn’t be stopped by showing the railcard at time of purchase) and buying a railcard discounted ticket without a railcard (which would)? The critical point is when the ticket is being used- not when it’s purchased. The only argument in favour of @show railcard to buy” is as a useful reminder to honest passengers that their railcard is no longer valid (or similar)

 

[WelshBluebird]

The whole conversation about checking a railcard when buying a ticket is utterly pointless as long as we have TVM's which let anyone buy a railcard discounted ticket without any checks! If anything ticket office staff who do try to be difficult there are just doing themselves out of a job as it means those people will just use a TVM instead.

 

[Berliner]

I am bewildered by the perverse attitude being expressed in this thread that the railway industry should not take reasonable steps to reduce fare evasion and fraud; in particular, the idea that insisting on proof of status before selling tickets at a discount is somehow reprehensible. We have several threads in this forum about fare evasion with detailed first hand evidence of the kind of tricks that a rogue element gets up to. The railway today is in a period of financial crisis which threatens its future existence. This is exactly the right moment to crack down on fraud and if doing so drives away that rogue element, so much the better. Honest people do not object to being asked to prove their status and it's delusional to imagine they would shun the railway forever more if asked to do so.

I also find it quite funny the amount of pages dedicated to those who find being asked to show a railcard is some affront to humanity or an example of making life difficult.

Many years ago, when I used to sell plane tickets, we asked for the passport of the intended ticket holder. A single person could come up and buy tickets for as many people as they wished, as long as they had each and every pasengers ID so we would put the exact name on the booking. If the buyer didn't have that we couldn't sell it because if we were issuing the ticket the name had to match the passport precisely. If we went on the buyers word and there was a mistake, well, we would then be liable as we would have sold a ticket not knowing if it matched the passengers ID. If someone went online and bought the ticket and made a mistake then that's on them. I suppose I'll be told my customer service was atrocious, I deserved abuse for this and I wasn't doing my job, going by the logic of some on here?

On that note it is quite ridiculous to suggests that customer facing staff who get abuse are somehow bad at their job and they need to change thier attitude. I've worked with people who I consider and I consider myself to be someone who Remains calm and professional when dealing with irate customers. That doesn't exempt me from abuse, if a customer is going to be abusive they will be abusive to whoever is telling them what they don't want to hear. It makes no odds if that employee is the epitome of customer service or not.

The customer is not always right and I find those who trot that line out just expect employees to break rules on a whim or constantly make exceptions for any and every scenario, rendering the rules pointless and ignoring the fact they may get in trouble from thier employers.

 

[The exile]

I also find it quite funny the amount of pages dedicated to those who find being asked to show a railcard is some affront to humanity or an example of making life difficult.

Many years ago, when I used to sell plane tickets, we asked for the passport of the intended ticket holder. A single person could come up and buy tickets for as many people as they wished, as long as they had each and every pasengers ID so we would put the exact name on the booking. If the buyer didn't have that we couldn't sell it because if we were issuing the ticket the name had to match the passport precisely. If we went on the buyers word and there was a mistake, well, we would then be liable as we would have sold a ticket not knowing if it matched the passengers ID. If someone went online and bought the ticket and made a mistake then that's on them. I suppose I'll be told my customer service was atrocious, I deserved abuse for this and I wasn't doing my job, going by the logic of some on here?

On that note it is quite ridiculous to suggests that customer facing staff who get abuse are somehow bad at their job and they need to change thier attitude. I've worked with people who I consider and I consider myself to be someone who Remains calm and professional when dealing with irate customers. That doesn't exempt me from abuse, if a customer is going to be abusive they will be abusive to whoever is telling them what they don't want to hear. It makes no odds if that employee is the epitome of customer service or not.

The customer is not always right and I find those who trot that line out just expect employees to break rules on a whim or constantly make exceptions for any and every scenario, rendering the rules pointless and ignoring the fact they may get in trouble from thier employers.

However you buy airline tickets, you have to provide ID. The point here is that you can buy railcard discounted tickets at Tvms and online with no proof of railcard, but it is apparently vital revenue protection to show a railcard when purchasing face to face - even though that gives no guarantee that you will have the railcard with you when you travel.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Maybe a different approach could be adopted. How about the ticket software is modified to print a 'railcard not verified (at time of issue)' box. A similar indicator would be useful if the railcard's validity expired before that of the ticket, - only likely to affect open returns for up to 28/30 days. Then this box is automatically checked except where a valid railcard has been verified, normally booking office or travelling ticket issuer. That means that a visible mark in the box would alert any checker to request sight of the railcard. Similarly, a gateline scanner could also flash up a warning to the local attendant to assess whether a check was necessary. That would make the ticket checker's job easier.

This just makes more work for everyone. Surely the answer is that railcards are checked on a journey when tickets are?

I also find it quite funny the amount of pages dedicated to those who find being asked to show a railcard is some affront to humanity or an example of making life difficult.

It's nice if you can afford to have a constant railcard. For many families money is very tight and if you can manage to eek extra weeks/months when you don't need one then you take them. Buying cheap advance tickets months ahead, but then being forced to buy a railcard that you're not going to use that far ahead too defeats the point. It's just utterly pointless. I can not grasp why anyone thinks it's a good idea. And I ask yet again for a coherent reason.

The customer is not always right and I find those who trot that line out just expect employees to break rules on a whim or constantly make exceptions for any and every scenario, rendering the rules pointless and ignoring the fact they may get in trouble from thier employers.

But the rules were set up to allow that. If it's customer service it's allowed, was the rule. Being tied up with pointless restrictive rules is what brings a company down. I'm very grateful not to have worked for a narrow-minded company like that.
I find it frustrating that the railway treats its customers as always wrong, and it's now scratching its head wondering how to increase passenger numbers.

 

[Berliner]

However you buy airline tickets, you have to provide ID. The point here is that you can buy railcard discounted tickets at Tvms and online with no proof of railcard, but it is apparently vital revenue protection to show a railcard when purchasing face to face - even though that gives no guarantee that you will have the railcard with you when you travel.

You don't have to provide ID for airline tickers online. You just put whatever name you want.

The point is if you're going in person to buy something from another person and that person asks for proof you can get a certain product that is not outrageous. If a member of staff sells something and knowingly doesn't check if the person is entitled to it then that's their fault. If a customer buys something online or at a machine and they knowingly put false information in then that's on them. I really struggle to see why so many are so outraged at staff asking for proof of railcard before selling a railcard ticket. It seems to be to be scraping the barrel to yet again find a stick to beat rail staff with on a rail enthusiast forum.

 

[Deafdoggie]

I really struggle to see why so many are so outraged at staff asking for proof of railcard before selling a railcard ticket. It seems to be to be scraping the barrel to yet again find a stick to beat rail staff with on a rail enthusiast forum.

We've been through this many times on this thread. It's because there can be many months between ticket purchase and ticket usage. Why buy a railcard months before you need to use it?

 

[ComUtoR]

If you're staff you have a priv all the time. That's not like Railcards where they only last 12 months.

My PRIV only lasts a year. My staff pass also only lasts a year.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My PRIV only lasts a year. My staff pass also only lasts a year.

However as long as you remain employed you get a new one every year. You don't have to pay £30 for it.

 

[Haywain]

However as long as you remain employed you get a new one every year. You don't have to pay £30 for it.

What's the relevance of this? It still has to be produced to buy tickets - and the only time I've not had to is when buying from the office I worked in.

 

[Deerfold]

I
Many years ago, when I used to sell plane tickets, we asked for the passport of the intended ticket holder. A single person could come up and buy tickets for as many people as they wished, as long as they had each and every pasengers ID so we would put the exact name on the booking. If the buyer didn't have that we couldn't sell it because if we were issuing the ticket the name had to match the passport precisely. If we went on the buyers word and there was a mistake, well, we would then be liable as we would have sold a ticket not knowing if it matched the passengers ID. If someone went online and bought the ticket and made a mistake then that's on them. I suppose I'll be told my customer service was atrocious, I deserved abuse for this and I wasn't doing my job, going by the logic of some on here?

Not sure of the relevance. You don't associate any details of the passenger with the rail ticket. I can see the advantage to the passenger of reminding them they need a railcard for the ticket they've bought. I can't see the advantage to anyone in refusing to sell it.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Not sure of the relevance. You don't associate any details of the passenger with the rail ticket. I can see the advantage to the passenger of reminding them they need a railcard for the ticket they've bought. I can't see the advantage to anyone in refusing to sell it.

This is what I have repeatedly asking. As yet, noone has answered! Just how does it benefit anyone refusing to sell an advance ticket without a railcard?

 

[Horizon22]

On the buying of tickets, I saw this graphic from the RDG today. The trend is only going to continue going one way. 23% is of course still not a tiny number but it’s by far from the majority (which it last was 10 years ago).

 

[43066]

This is what I have repeatedly asking. As yet, noone has answered! Just how does it benefit anyone refusing to sell an advance ticket without a railcard?

It has been clarified by @Haywain upthread that staff have discretion/are permitted to sell the tickets in advance without seeing a railcard, giving a reminder a railcard will be required, but refuse on the day if it cannot be produced.

That seems like a perfectly sensible position to me?

 

[Haywain]

It has been clarified by @Haywain upthread that staff have discretion to sell the tickets in advance, with a warning a railcard will be required, but refuse on the day if it cannot be produced.

I commented on a specific case where a railcard was being produced which expired earlier then the ticket being purchased. In that situation there are no grounds top refuse to sell the ticket. With regard to the bigger issue of buying tickets without being able to produce a railcard at the time, I believe there are still instructions in place that staff should check the railcard at that point. My own view is that a pragamatic view should be taken and advance purchase should be permitted as it is online or from self service machines, and that is how I would proceed. For purchases on the day of travel I don't think it is unreasonable to check the railcard at the counter and I can say from experience that doing so does reveal a lot of expired railcards and some cases of misuse.