Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
because the train company had put its OWN posters up in places where the prescribed ones needed to be - even though their own posters had a better impact than the proper ones
I've noticed this on GTR, where some stations now have posters along the lines of "It's not worth the risk" and "Travelling without a valid ticket carries a fine of up to £1000" and that's effectively the entire A2 poster.
I'll try and grab a pic of this on the way home this evening if I remember.
There is nothing wrong with displaying such posters, and they are clearly more effective at getting the basic message across. However, the legislation requires the prescribed notices to be displayed and any posters are additional. The prominence of the prescribed notice is the issue.
My point is, like furlong said, these have replaced what were originally proper PF signage. I've seen these at, for example, Haywards Heath on the platforms themselves where previously there were the correct warning posters to comply with the visible to people changing trains part of the legislation, I believe.
I'd like to turn this around and see if we can identify some stations which people think demonstrate good examples of complying with the rules. I think there are two separate categories here. Firstly compliance with the strict letter of the rules and secondly compliance with the spirit of the rules i.e. getting the message across that you shouldn't board without a valid ticket etc. in a better way than the dreadful yellow posters. There are very few compulsory ticket areas but they do seem to do a better job than other stations at telling people even though the basic requirement is identical (just the notice is different).
As a reminder, it's the unmissable presence of the posters that's used to allow the scheme to assume dishonesty and therefore impose a penalty - an honest person would respond to the posters and not board in circumstances where they are subject to a penalty.
Display of Notices
8.—(1) The requirements for the display of notices are as follows.
(2) Where any entrance onto a platform at the station is not the entrance to, or situated within, a compulsory ticket area, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a standard notice”) must be displayed at that entrance.
(3) If the station has one or more compulsory ticket areas, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a compulsory ticket area notice”) must be displayed at each entrance into a compulsory ticket area.
(4) Standard notices and compulsory ticket area notices must also be displayed at sufficient locations around the station so that at least one notice is readily visible to passengers prior to boarding a train at the station, including passengers changing from one train to another train.
Standard notice
1.—(1) A standard notice must contain—
(a) the penalty fares logo as shown in Part 3;
(b) the word “WARNING” in large, prominent text at the top of the notice;
(c) the wording “Please buy your ticket before you travel otherwise you may be charged a Penalty Fare”;
(d) the wording “A Penalty Fare is £20 or twice the full single fare applicable to your journey (whichever is greater)”;
(e) wording which indicates where information about the circumstances in which a person may be charged a penalty fare in relation to travel by, presence on or leaving a train is published or may be obtained; and
(f) the logo, and name if the logo does not contain the name, of each operator that charges penalty fares in relation to trains arriving at or departing from the area of the station to which the
notice applies.
Compulsory ticket area notice
2.—(1) A compulsory ticket area notice must contain—
(a) the penalty fares logo as shown in Part 3;
(b) the word “WARNING” in large, prominent text at the top of the notice;
(c) the wording—
(i) “You are about to enter a Compulsory Ticket Area”;
(ii) “You must have a platform ticket or valid travel ticket before passing this point”;
and
(iii) “Otherwise you may be charged a Penalty Fare”;
(d) the wording “A Penalty Fare is a minimum of £20. If you intend to travel, a Penalty Fare is £20 or twice the full single fare applicable to your journey (whichever is greater)”;
(e) wording which indicates where information about the circumstances in which a person may be charged a penalty fare for being in or leaving a compulsory ticket area is published or may be obtained; and
(f) the logo, and name if the logo does not contain the name, of each operator that charges penalty
fares in relation to trains arriving at or departing from the compulsory ticket area.
I'd like to turn this around and see if we can identify some stations which people think demonstrate good examples of complying with the rules. I think there are two separate categories here. Firstly compliance with the strict letter of the rules and secondly compliance with the spirit of the rules i.e. getting the message across that you shouldn't board without a valid ticket etc. in a better way than the dreadful yellow posters. There are very few compulsory ticket areas but they do seem to do a better job than other stations at telling people even though the basic requirement is identical (just the notice is different).
As a reminder, it's the unmissable presence of the posters that's used to allow the scheme to assume dishonesty and therefore impose a penalty - an honest person would respond to the posters and not board in circumstances where they are subject to a penalty.
The notices at Blackwater are prominent at the (ungated) entrances to the platforms. That said, there is a long history of passengers buying tickets from the guard on North Downs Line services and, from what I've observed, ticketless travel is often resolved by a sale on the train.
As a reminder, it's the unmissable presence of the posters that's used to allow the scheme to assume dishonesty and therefore impose a penalty - an honest person would respond to the posters and not board in circumstances where they are subject to a penalty.
Serious question - what happens to honest people who can't read, or who don't speak English, or who are visually impaired? How is the unmissable information communicated to them?
As, indeed, are all Railway companies responsible for knowing and following the law in regards to disability discrimination, for example. So the question remains.
As, indeed, are all Railway companies responsible for knowing and following the law in regards to disability discrimination, for example. So the question remains.
I suspect that now the Penalty Fares stakes are higher, the flimsiness of the current arrangements will start to gain more scrutiny. In the same way that parking fines are starting to be ruled invalid because of technicalities like the paint of double yellow lines having deteriorated to such a point that they no longer form the straight and unbroken parallel lines as required by law, or similar technical exceptions.
I went back to the station I mentioned last week, as it happens, and had a closer look at the arrangements. Only one penalty fare poster on the platforms, as noted. In a position some way after the point where someone could reasonably have boarded a train without seeing it. However, to my surprise (as it's a station I use reasonably frequently), there's a separate poster up by the entrance, where you walk in from the street.
Problem solved, you might think, but unless you're particularly observant, if you were approaching the station entrance from the left, you could easily walk past it and down to the platforms without it ever having crossed your eyeline. (If approaching from the right, the poster would at some point have been straight in front of you, so harder to ignore. However, you'd have to be walking along an unpavemented side of the road in order to manage that.)
Even if you did see this poster, it was housed in a container, behind glass where the lower part was covered in condensation and parts of previously-removed posters, thereby obscuring much of the legally-required text.
This kind of scrutiny can only lead to a new PPI-style bonanza. 'If you've received a penalty fare when travelling on the railway, you may be entitled to compensation...'
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
As, indeed, are all Railway companies responsible for knowing and following the law in regards to disability discrimination, for example. So the question remains.
Not being able to read written English isn’t a protected characteristic *unless* it’s because of a disability so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.
Not being able to read written English isn’t a protected characteristic *unless* it’s because of a disability so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.
I gave just one example of how there is rather more nuance in the real world than the "Ultimately, everyone is responsible for knowing and following the law." statement, that's all.
As, indeed, are all Railway companies responsible for knowing and following the law in regards to disability discrimination, for example. So the question remains.
You're inviting me to respond to statements which I have not made. My point is that if the regulations rely on the idea that "everyone must have seen the poster" because it is required to be on display for the issuance of penalty fares to be legal, then the very real question of what about the people who did not, could not, and can not see it? arises.
You're inviting me to respond to statements which I have not made. My point is that if the regulations rely on the idea that "everyone must have seen the poster" because it is required to be on display for the issuance of penalty fares to be legal, then the very real question of what about the people who did not, could not, and can not see it? arises.
We're heading for the territory of the RailForums Standard Minority here – I post a reply, you change the question, repeat ad nauseam. So I'll bow out.
Equalities Act 2010 requires reasonable adjustments to be made for certain characteristics. This includes disabilities. An individual with a cognitive disability may not be able to understand the signs, for example, so a reasonable adjustment may be to let them temporarily buy tickets on the train.
I gave just one example of how there is rather more nuance in the real world than the "Ultimately, everyone is responsible for knowing and following the law." statement, that's all.
The requirement is to display signage. If somebody can’t read (or hear - there’s generally plenty of audible warnings too), then that’s a valid cause of appeal for a PFN, or if defence. If a TOC can prove they supply signage, and somebody insisted they couldn’t read, I’d put it to them that there are also plenty of audible warnings on trains and at stations.
All that is in addition to the fact that in all honesty, Byelaw 18 is strict liability anyway…
