Attitudes to ticketless travel

[43066]

Plucking out a solitary case from the thousands on here kind of proves the point @43066 was making! I'm certain there are more on here and i'm more certain there are many more cases that haven't been talked about here. But in the context of how many cases are heard every year it will be a tiny percentage.

Indeed.

It stems from the woeful lack of understanding as to how Oyster works. In the first case the passenger was not English and had no clue. As far as they were concerned they might well have done something wrong. GTR were interpreting the journey history in the wrong way. I strongly believe that were it not for my intervention the case may well have ended up in court, or at the very least the passenger would have been out of pocket.

Leave the first case to one side and consider that 6 months later GTR were going down the same route again. That to my mind is gross negligence.

That is bad and it’s great that you intervened and assisted. Twice in six months does need to be viewed in the context of the total number of cases dealt with, however.

 

[nanstallon]

Going back to the OP's story, if his father had gone out his way to make a payment at his destination, he ran a serious risk of then being reported for ticketless travel, penalised £100 and possibly prosecuted.
I was in a similar situation once, when my Keycarded season ticket had expired the day before. But there are barriers at St Pancras, so I had to explain the scenario to the gate minder. She (wonderful lady!) let me through to buy a £20 return ticket at the adjacent ticket office. But at an unbarriered station, I wouldn't have sought out someone to give me a £100 penalty.

A good deed seldom goes unpunished.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2022 ==

Agreed - the railway is given far too much legal power with which it is free to slap honest people who’ve made a mistake with criminal records and 3 figure fees to recuperate petty sums, often less than £3-4.

Reform will come, and the sooner the better. The current system is unfairly biased towards the TOC’s, and this, combined with many staff taking the view that the system and “the railway” should come before passengers can lead to the impression of a very anti-passenger railway.

Agreed - although many seem to hold the view that the railway would be better with fewer customers! There are far too many in the industry who have little to no concept of “customer service”, combine this with an unfairly biased set of laws and you make the industry very unattractive and unfriendly.

It often feels like the railways are out to get you and want to catch you out - very complex ticketing rules (how many passengers would even know when to consult the routeing guide, let alone how to?) and very harsh penalties for failing to comply perfectly are not entirely fair for those inexperienced to the system.

Indeed - honest mistakes do happen. Teenagers and young people get a bad name throughout society (unjustifiably so in my view), and this system targets these people (putting them off the railway), as well as those who are on low incomes and cannot afford a three figure settlement to pay for a 50p fare anomaly.

Perfectly put - and a symptom of a railway which prioritises itself and revenue over providing a decent service for passengers and developing a good image for itself.

I hear the sound of a hammer hitting a nail on the head. Does any other industry regard its customers with so much suspicion and often downright hostility? Ticket irregularities should come under civil litigation, not criminal.

 

[njamescouk]

the train companies are effectively saying that fares aren't worth collecting on short hops. the marginal cost of a fare dodger vs the cost of ticket office, gateline etc doesn't work. additionally penalty fares are hugely profitable with very little in the way of costs (for the train co).

 

[Ligeraceaster]

I'm sure this has probably been mentioned before but what was the comparative level of fare dodging under nationalisation and attitudes towards it at the time? I often find that things were just as bad in the past but now they are given more of a platform or spotlight.

I remember getting a train from Sileby to Leicester about 10 years ago and nobody coming round on the train to allow me to purchase, the barriers were open at Leicester so I could have just not paid, I did but a lot of people would say tough luck in the same situation.

 

[Tallguy]

They do north of Banbury plus the LHCS throughout.

Never seen a guard on a Chiltern north or south of Banbury. Can only recall one on train ticket check in the last decade. Never been on a Chiltern LHCS service So can’t comment but could understand if it did have a guard on those services due to the different stock.

 

[philthetube]

I remember travelling from Newington Kent in slam door stock many years ago, for many local journeys after lunchtime there were no options to pay, compartment stock so no revenue collection possible and no machines of platforms, most ticket offices closed at lunchtime.

 

[jon0844]

I think there are YouTube videos of local news broadcasts back in the NSE days, and on them you can see them talking of successes after stings/blocks and calculating huge amounts of money lost every year through fare evasion.

 

[43066]

I hear the sound of a hammer hitting a nail on the head. Does any other industry regard its customers with so much suspicion and often downright hostility? Ticket irregularities should come under civil litigation, not criminal.

Should shoplifting be decriminalised? How about pickpocketing?

Does any other industry have as many “customers” who expect the moon on a stick but routinely avoid paying for its services? I’d like to see enforcement ramped up, and proper punishments introduced, including such things as bans of repeat offenders from the network and civil suits being brought against individuals by TOCs for delay minutes due to drunken behaviour/trespass etc. (the airlines use both of these).

“You know that train you delayed for an hour by being too drunk and the police having to be called, that’s £10,000 in delays please. No money? We’ll sue you anyway and have you declared bankrupt so you can’t so much as get a mobile phone contract for the next few years. See it. Say it. Sorted.”

 

[DelayRepay]

I am not defending fare evaders, but I think the railways don't help by making it too easy to get away with.

On my regular journey on the southern WCML, I think I've had my ticket checked on board once this year, for a journey I make on average once a week. So they are entirely reliant on barriers to catch people without tickets - but many of the smaller stations are not barriered and at Euston they aren't always in use. It is easy to see why someone would decide to 'chance it' given there is virtually no effort to enforce the rules.

In the last 12 months of using a Network Railcard, I have never been asked to show it to a member of staff.

To use the supermarket analogy, it's a bit like Tesco getting rid of the tills, security guards, product tags and CCTV, and just having an honesty box by the door. I doubt they'd last long if they did that!

I wonder if the railways recognise that regular ticket inspections are a deterrent to fare evasion, even if they don't actually catch many people without tickets?

 

[nanstallon]

Should shoplifting be decriminalised? How about pickpocketing?

Does any other industry have as many “customers” who expect the moon on a stick but routinely avoid paying for its services? I’d like to see enforcement ramped up, and proper punishments introduced, including such things as bans of repeat offenders from the network and civil suits being brought against individuals by TOCs for delay minutes due to drunken behaviour/trespass etc. (the airlines use both of these).

“You know that train you delayed for an hour by being too drunk and the police having to be called, that’s £10,000 in delays please. No money? We’ll sue you anyway and have you declared bankrupt so you can’t so much as get a mobile phone contract for the next few years. See it. Say it. Sorted.”

OK, all for cracking down on yobbish behaviour that makes life a misery for others. But if you are going to prosecute people for having the wrong ticket, or for not standing in a queue for 15 minutes to buy a ticket, then you should be stopped. The present legislation is cockeyed in that the TOC doesn't have to prove any intent. Perhaps the privileged position of the railway dates from when railways were more of a public service. They cannot fairly expect to continue having their cake and eating it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Never seen a guard on a Chiltern north or south of Banbury. Can only recall one on train ticket check in the last decade. Never been on a Chiltern LHCS service So can’t comment but could understand if it did have a guard on those services due to the different stock.

Whether you have seen one doesn't mean there isn't one. DOO is not permitted north of Banbury, full stop!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Sep 2022 ==

Should shoplifting be decriminalised?

There may actually be a pragmatic argument for Tesco's security guard to be able to issue a £50 plus cost legally backed FPN for petty theft, yes. I suspect it would reduce losses compared with the present situation where for small thefts the Police aren't interested. Or perhaps if you fail to scan something on the self checkout you pay double for that item?

How about pickpocketing?

Not a major issue in the UK, but FPNs, analogous to PFs, do exist for many minor offences e.g. road traffic ones.

Does any other industry have as many “customers” who expect the moon on a stick

Astonishing. Do you use a different railway to me? I find it more likely my basic expectations aren't met.

but routinely avoid paying for its services? I’d like to see enforcement ramped up, and proper punishments introduced, including such things as bans of repeat offenders from the network and civil suits being brought against individuals by TOCs for delay minutes due to drunken behaviour/trespass etc. (the airlines use both of these).

“You know that train you delayed for an hour by being too drunk and the police having to be called, that’s £10,000 in delays please. No money? We’ll sue you anyway and have you declared bankrupt so you can’t so much as get a mobile phone contract for the next few years. See it. Say it. Sorted.”

I do support that.

 

[Starmill]

There may actually be a pragmatic argument for Tesco's security guard to be able to issue a £50 plus cost legally backed FPN for petty theft, yes. I suspect it would reduce losses compared with the present situation where for small thefts the Police aren't interested. Or perhaps if you fail to scan something on the self checkout you pay double for that item?

The supermarkets are much, much more concerned than the railway companies about the value of their brand and their reputation with frequent customers, which makes this kind of enforcement rather more challenging.

 

[contrex]

I'm sure this has probably been mentioned before but what was the comparative level of fare dodging under nationalisation and attitudes towards it at the time? I often find that things were just as bad in the past but now they are given more of a platform or spotlight.

When I were a lad (1960s) it was fairly standard, at certain stations on the London area SR and LT, at quiet times, to say to the guy waiting by the exit at Tulse Hill, (e.g.) "Streatham Common please" even if you had come from Purley Oaks, if you get my drift. Or (at Stockwell) "Kennington please", even if you'd come from Harrow & Wealdstone. He'd say "One and threepence please" or "ninepence" or whatever and you'd hand that over and go on your way. No receipt of course! Everyone, except, I dare say, the BR Board & LTE, was happy. Gripping was hard with all those compartments and non-corridor stock.

 

[Edsmith]

Whether you have seen one doesn't mean there isn't one. DOO is not permitted north of Banbury, full stop!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Sep 2022 ==



There may actually be a pragmatic argument for Tesco's security guard to be able to issue a £50 plus cost legally backed FPN for petty theft, yes. I suspect it would reduce losses compared with the present situation where for small thefts the Police aren't interested. Or perhaps if you fail to scan something on the self checkout you pay double for that item?

I don't see how that would work, people would tell the security guard where to stick the fine and while they were busy arguing about it somebody else would be going round doing a trolley dash.

Anyway getting back to railways I saw a very honest lady going to the ticket office at Elephant & Castle and saying she had travelled from Shoreham (Kent) and hadn't been able to purchase a ticket, I suspect most people would have happily taken the freebie. Such honesty could put somebody at risk of a penalty fare?

 

[AdamWW]

Anyway getting back to railways I saw a very honest lady going to the ticket office at Elephant & Castle and saying she had travelled from Shoreham (Kent) and hadn't been able to purchase a ticket, I suspect most people would have happily taken the freebie. Such honesty could put somebody at risk of a penalty fare?

An interesting question regarding honesty.

There seems to be a presumption that any sign of dishonesty is evidence of criminal intent.

But if you realise on the train that your season ticket ran out yesterday and are legitimately concerned you're risking prosecution for an honest mistake if you go to the barrier and say what's happened, is it that unreasonable to try to avoid detection (maybe go to a station you know is unmanned) then buy an appropriate ticket?

As a change from supermarket analogies, here's a question for car drivers: if you realise you've exceeded the speed limit, do you report yourself to the police and ask to be fined? If not, aren't you stealing the amount of the fine from taxpayers?

The marginal cost of a fare evading passenger is generally very small, afte all. The "theft" is of the money you would otherwise have paid.

 

[ChewChewTrain]

“You know that train you delayed for an hour by being too drunk and the police having to be called, that’s £10,000 in delays please. No money? We’ll sue you anyway and have you declared bankrupt so you can’t so much as get a mobile phone contract for the next few years. See it. Say it. Sorted.”

That last sentence alone makes me glad I started this thread (talking of which, thanks to everyone for over 100 interesting replies)! And I normally find it so very irritating…

 

[Tetchytyke]

But if you realise on the train that your season ticket ran out yesterday and are legitimately concerned you're risking prosecution for an honest mistake if you go to the barrier and say what's happened, is it that unreasonable to try to avoid detection (maybe go to a station you know is unmanned) then buy an appropriate ticket?

And that's certainly what happens at places like Leeds, where people who front up to their mistake get pulled from a queue and get issued with Penalty Fares or worse.

When "I've made a mistake, how can I fix it?" is answered with a £100 fine and/or a notice of prosecution, of course people are going to be reluctant to approach staff for help. No good deed goes unpunished.

Train companies target the low-hanging fruit and hit them with huge penalties for small errors. The real dodgers, on the other hand, tell the security guards to %$@! off, jump the barrier, and are on their way without a backwards glance.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Sep 2022 ==

Most local rail services throughout Europe sell via TVMs only.

Most local rail services throughout Europe have sufficient and suitable TVMs.

I don't know if it's changed, but Apsley had one TVM, which only took cards. Great on a Monday morning when there's 100 people waiting to buy a ticket.

 

[Edsmith]

And that's certainly what happens at places like Leeds, where people who front up to their mistake get pulled from a queue and get issued with Penalty Fares or worse.

When "I've made a mistake, how can I fix it?" is answered with a £100 fine and/or a notice of prosecution, of course people are going to be reluctant to approach staff for help. No good deed goes unpunished.

Train companies target the low-hanging fruit and hit them with huge penalties for small errors. The real dodgers, on the other hand, tell the security guards to %$@! off, jump the barrier, and are on their way without a backwards glance.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Sep 2022 ==



Most local rail services throughout Europe have sufficient and suitable TVMs.

I don't know if it's changed, but Apsley had one TVM, which only took cards. Great on a Monday morning when there's 100 people waiting to buy a ticket.

It's exactly the same in London and the south east, we won't see any chav/wanna be gangster types on here asking for advice because they get away with it time and time again.

 

[WesternLancer]

The reality is that the vast majority of fare dodgers on the railway are druggies, scummers, known to the police already.

I do tend to agree with 'vast majority'. Yet at the hours those people often tend to travel, making travel far less pleasant for the rest of us, they do not seem to be targeted by staff / BTP etc for fare checks...

Says I (last trip circa 10pm on Thameslink - weed smokers in 1st class area, may or may not have had tickets)
Second to last trip - Southern Coastway West (several people in 1st class on short hop trips who almost certainly did not have 1st class tickets)

I pay for my own 1st class tickets as I'm not rail staff or priv I should add for avoidance of doubt.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Sep 2022 ==

I am not defending fare evaders, but I think the railways don't help by making it too easy to get away with.

On my regular journey on the southern WCML, I think I've had my ticket checked on board once this year, for a journey I make on average once a week. So they are entirely reliant on barriers to catch people without tickets - but many of the smaller stations are not barriered and at Euston they aren't always in use. It is easy to see why someone would decide to 'chance it' given there is virtually no effort to enforce the rules.

In the last 12 months of using a Network Railcard, I have never been asked to show it to a member of staff.

To use the supermarket analogy, it's a bit like Tesco getting rid of the tills, security guards, product tags and CCTV, and just having an honesty box by the door. I doubt they'd last long if they did that!

I wonder if the railways recognise that regular ticket inspections are a deterrent to fare evasion, even if they don't actually catch many people without tickets?

I do very much agree with this analysis.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Sep 2022 ==

The supermarkets are much, much more concerned than the railway companies about the value of their brand and their reputation with frequent customers, which makes this kind of enforcement rather more challenging.

I guess that is because they feel there i genuine competition and choice. For whatever reason people don't seem to see the car, bus or the coach as a like for like choice for much of their travel arrangements (and I'd tend to agree with that in general terms).

 

[AdamWW]

You’ve rather missed the point that prosecution, in itself, is merely a process. It’s neither a punishment, nor a criminal record. Do you object to the way the criminal law operates in this country? How should it be changed?

I don't think I have missed the point.

In my understanding (always happy to be corrected) in the UK the discretion and flexibility that any legal systems needs largely takes place before a trial. The police don't go around charging people every time they see something which is technically a crime. The CPS applies a "public interest test". But once a case goes to trial the process becomes much more rigid and the question is then just whether the defendent committed the exact crime they are being prosecuted for.

In the case of the railways there is a strict liability offence available which criminalises honest mistakes where there is clearly no intent to defraud (e.g. failling to pay a zero fare excess, not being able to show a railcard because of phone problems, losing a ticket then finding it a minute later).

A crime has been committed so if it goes to trial I don't think there is any scope for a not guilty verdict.

If someone is found guilty in such cases it seems entirely unreasonable to me to say that all the railway did was choose to prosecute and it wasn't them that convicted.

This isn't the place to discuss what I think about British criminal law in general, but if it was up to me I would not permit the railways to threaten prosecution (backed up with a very real chance of conviction thanks to strict liability) where there is no evidence of intent to fare evade and then offer to back down in return for cash. This is a serious conflict of interest and I'm not aware of anything similar in the UK outside the railways. Even if you argue that this conflict of interest is never abused (reading this sub-forum suggests otherwise to me) that still doesn't make it appropriate that it exists.

Indeed so, because they simply do what’s required of them. Most normal, decent people simply buy the ticket required. Discretion is almost invariably used to let people off entirely who have made an honest mistake, then you have penalty fares, then you have prosecution as a final option.

I think you and I live in very different worlds.

I live in one in which people do what they think is required of them. They think that if there isn't time to get a ticket before getting on a train then it's fine to get one from the guard and if they can't do that then buy at the other end. And in many cases why wouldn't they? Nobody ever tells them it's wrong. Then one day if they're unlucky they turn up at the far end when revenue protection are around and suddenly they're in trouble - even though it's painfully obvious they aren't intending to fare evade because the station is always barriered and they can't get out without buying one.

They think that if they lose their ticket or their phone battery runs out and they can't show an e-ticket they'll be asked to buy another one. Not threatened with prosecution.

And I'm sure you are aware that penalty fares aren't available everywhere, in which case the system moves straight from letting someone off to threatening criminal proceedings rather than it being a final option.

(On the other hand, maybe I just know a disreputable group of people but I suspect that most people I know, faced with a journey where the first chance to pay was at the destination would reckon it was the railway's problem not theirs and walk off without paying).

 

[Starmill]

A crime has been committed so if it goes to trial I don't think there is any scope for a not guilty verdict.

There would usually be scope for a guilty verdict and a conditional discharge. In other words no penalty applies on this specific occasion, subject to your proper conduct, but it may do in future if the offence is repeated. There's also the possibility of an absolute discharge. However neither of these are common.

If a single incident of a minor offence is prosecuted and pleaded guilty, a small penalty such as a fine plus any order to pay compensation or victim surcharge is the most likely outcome.

 

[AdamWW]

There would usually be scope for a guilty verdict and a conditional discharge. In other words no penalty applies on this specific occasion, subject to your proper conduct, but it may do in future if the offence is repeated. There's also the possibility of an absolute discharge. However neither of these are common. If a single incident of a minor offence is prosecuted and pleaded guilty, a small penalty such as a fine plus any compensation or victim surcharge is the most likely outcome.

Yes I was trying not to make my post too long so I didn't add that (in general) some discretion comes in again at the end when it comes to sentencing, though I believe within strict guidelines and with a possible mandatory minimum sentence (though not usually for offences that railways prosecute for).

 

[Starmill]

Yes I was trying not to make my post too long so I didn't add that (in general) some discretion comes in again at the end when it comes to sentencing, though I believe within strict guidelines and with a possible mandatory minimum sentence (though not usually for offences that railways prosecute for).

Quite true yes, and there's a separate debate about the merits of Parliament leaving the Judge or Magistrates the broadest possible range of sentences nowadays, and the shortcomings of mandatory minima or otherwise highly prescriptive guidelines.

 

[AdamWW]

Quite true yes, and there's a separate debate about the merits of Parliament leaving the Judge or Magistrates the broadest possible range of sentences nowadays, and the shortcomings of mandatory minima or otherwise highly prescriptive guidelines.

Indeed but perhaps not in this thread!

 

[BanburyBlue]

Never seen a guard on a Chiltern north or south of Banbury. Can only recall one on train ticket check in the last decade. Never been on a Chiltern LHCS service So can’t comment but could understand if it did have a guard on those services due to the different stock.

I travel from Banbury to Birmingham on Chiltern a couple of days a week, and there are regular ticket checks on the train. I'm travelling peak time, so not sure if this makes a difference. And seem to get more checks going from Banbury to Birmingham in the morning, as opposed to the return from Birmingham to Banbury in the afternoon.

 

[boiledbeans2]

Most local rail services throughout Europe have sufficient and suitable TVMs.

I don't know if it's changed, but Apsley had one TVM, which only took cards. Great on a Monday morning when there's 100 people waiting to buy a ticket.

I'm reminded of my recent visit to London Fenchurch Street. The back entrance (nearest to Tower Hill LU) had only 1 TVM, and there was a long queue.

I got to the main entrance. It was a weekend so the ticket office were closed. There were only 2 TVMs at the main entrance, with 1 out of order. So a London Terminal only has 2 functioning TVMs.

 

[bramling]

“You know that train you delayed for an hour by being too drunk and the police having to be called, that’s £10,000 in delays please. No money? We’ll sue you anyway and have you declared bankrupt so you can’t so much as get a mobile phone contract for the next few years. See it. Say it. Sorted.”

Really like this!

 

[Wallsendmag]

I'm reminded of my recent visit to London Fenchurch Street. The back entrance (nearest to Tower Hill LU) had only 1 TVM, and there was a long queue.

I got to the main entrance. It was a weekend so the ticket office were closed. There were only 2 TVMs at the main entrance, with 1 out of order. So a London Terminal only has 2 functioning TVMs.

Still cant work out why anyone uses a TVM anymore.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Still cant work out why anyone uses a TVM anymore.

Can’t speak for anyone else, but the couple of times I’ve tried using e-tickets, I’ve struggled to get the QR code to scan at the barrier.

OK, this is probably user failure rather than the technology, but for the moment that means paper tickets for me - and since TVMs are the way to get paper tickets, I’ll use the TVM.

 

[Hadders]

Still cant work out why anyone uses a TVM anymore.

I still can't purchase a Stevenage to London Zones 1-6 Travelcard at the weekend without using a TVM or ticket office....