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!
I don't think it is reasonable for ticket office staff to be able to offer the cheapest fare all the time. Ie I ask for a return from A to D, but the cheapest option is an anytime single from A to B, an anytime single from B to C, an off peak return from C to D, an evening single from C to B and then an evening single from B to A.
[..]
There's no obligation on them to do that - they are supposed to offer the best ticket for the journey but not best combo of tickets.
However, if you consider this another way. Split tickets are legitimate. There are companies now making 9% of the ticket sale price (I think that was at one point the standard for retail but I can be wrong), plus splitting the tickets where they keep 15% of the difference (trainsplit for example). As a ticket retailer they are making more commission and that cut from selling a split ticket than from selling one ticket.
One man's ability to say "it can' t be done" is another man's opportunity to make money showing that it can be. A TOC's own website can choose to go full-fat on all the sales, and lose money to trainsplit, or they can choose to follow trainsplit and do it themselves.
Somebody who loses his ticket while on the train is guilty of an offence of not showing his ticket when asked to do so, and can be prosecuted with all that that means for his career etc even if he can prove that he had bought the ticket. So, no dishonesty, but still prosecuted.
However it is possible that a 'lost' ticket had actually been given to someone else; If there are loopholes in the system, people will know about them and exploit them!
But I agree, the fares structure is complex (and with the 'Anytime' wording, sometimes downright misleading), however simplifying it would not necessarily result in cheaper fares, probably quite the opposite. And ticket inspecting staff must have proper and ongoing training.
Thing is if I was to check tickets and make sure the tickets where valid for the day of travel and not the time restrictions and let them through they’d get fined I just try stop them getting fined.
An investigation should take place for every ticketing mistake in case it can be proven to be deliberate? For really major issues, then yes by all means complete a TIR but this thread is about people being issued TIRs and similar harsh treatment for trivial matters.
Your argument would be better if you suggested that if the investigation uncovered no previous offences some leniency might be applied. Passengers need to appreciate and accept that their online purchase history is a massive digital fingerprint - and should expect that when they come to the attention of the authorities their fingerprint will be checked for other transgressions. If they want to lessen the scope of the investigation they should not leave their fingerprints but wear gloves (buy paper tickets and use cash).
Evidence of what tickets I purchase is in no way evidence of what tickets I have used; I often travel on tickets bought for me by someone else (including the ticket I am using right now) and similarly often buy tickets for others.
People who claim there is no correlation to things such as checking back on motoring offences or in retail beware - with technology it’s coming to cars and already some people are seeing hikes in insurance rates because of their (perceived as poor) driving style. No arguments - it’s pay more or go elsewhere. Soon it will be checking back on speeding using GPS, etc. and that will open the door to things such as ignoring no turn / no stopping signs. And supermarkets already use CCTV to help identify suspected shop lifters
How many staff are going to be needed to go through CCTV and all sorts of stuff like that over passengers who don't quite have the right ticket?! How much is this going to cost?
The messaging on anytime tickets is misleading at best. I’ve contacted ToC who is currently looking to prosecute my son for an 85p underpayment (railcard used before 10am)…it was a mistake and first time he’d made a mistake as shown by his purchase history they reviewed. When referring to the ticket being misleading they said I should call Trainline. I did and Trainlain told me it’s the ToC who I need to speak to. They put me through to ToC who kindly advised I should speak to Trainline. Processes and messaging need to change. People who continue to cheat the system should be the ones that are prosecuted
I saw this thread on X/Twitter this morning https://x.com/jackfifield/status/1843648136268656806 by Jack Fifield, currently of the Bolton News, detailing instances of S5(3) RORA being used to prosecute people where they had used a railcard but whilst a minimum fare applied: Here we go, this...
www.railforums.co.uk
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
1) A ticketing system which a best is obtuse and difficult to navigate and at worst is deliberately complex and confusing with the intention that the passenger pays the most possible even if cheaper tickets exist, and
I don't think the fares "system" (in terms of the fundamental fares structure) is the problem per se; any attempts to "simplify it" generally (albeit not always) result in a loss of passenger rights and/or an increase in fares. The problem is harsh treatment when people don't quite have the right ticket (or if they do have the right ticket but the staff think otherwise!) and the lack of rights / mechanisms to fix mistakes made under certain circumstances.
2) An “our passengers are criminals” mentality which pervades some staff / operators.Needlessly complex tickets is bad enough - made far worse when some rail staff seem deliberately ignorant of basics such as NRCoT or even the ticket restrictions of their own company-issued tickets
Indeed this is a major problem which some people sadly seem to either be unable to grasp or they have a desire to downplay the seriousness of it. Any attempts to downplay this will only result in me being more determined to set the record straight and I hope that others feel similarily; we can't allow those who want to sweep these issues under the carpet, or justify/downplay such actions to get their way, and I am glad people such as yourself and others are highlighting these issues.
Ultimately, this is an area which GBR is going to have to fix because it is bringing the industry into disrepute. I know quite a few people who have simply given up using the train - too expensive, too unreliable, too risky.
I hope so, but have no confidence in this happening. I agree the industry is being brought into disrepute by the actions of some train companies/staff.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I don't think it is reasonable for ticket office staff to be able to offer the cheapest fare all the time. Ie I ask for a return from A to D, but the cheapest option is an anytime single from A to B, an anytime single from B to C, an off peak return from C to D, an evening single from C to B and then an evening single from B to A.
That is not the "cheapest fare" from A to D. It is the cheapest through fare that should be offered. However this is not always offered, particularly in cases where a slower operator prices the ticket.
If people want a combination of tickets, don't use a ticket office; use our site instead!
Ok, maybe if they have a booking system that can find that for them (and that journey is extremely time sensitive with the peak hour window) - but certainly no expectations for them to be able to answer "I want to get from A to D and get to D around 11 am and come back after 7. What is the best fare?" with something that detailed. Maybe an anytime single from A to D and an evening single from D to A, rather than an anytime return.
1. I frequently use split ticketing to reduce travel costs and find I have to tell the ticket office staff which is the cheapest fare for each leg of the journey. For example the existance of an Avanti Super Off Peak return from Milton Keynes Central to Euston was not known about at Wolverhampton.
Ticket office staff are under instructions not to look up combinations; if you do your own research and find combinations that you want to purchase, then the onus is on you to ask for those, specifically.
Alternatively you can save time by using a website that calculates all this for you, such as our site (many people have spent many hours doing research so that passengers don't have to!)
2. Recently found that a ticket booked from Wolverhampton to Overpool via Chester is considerably cheaper than Wolverhampton to Chester valid on the same service!
It may not be intended to be valid that way; in which case, either posting about it here, or using it to finish "short" at ticket barriers at Chester (if it doesn't work the barriers) may lead to the rules of the ticket being changed. If you find an anomaly it is best to use it discreetly and only do so if it won't come to the attention of any staff members or pricing managers etc.
Yes, I have corrected myself there now. See #48 above.
I think we will have to disagree here. A customer is provided with a fare quote which they are free to accept or reject. There is zero obligation to use the train if you think the fare is unreasonable.
This conveniently ignores the points highlighted above; if it was as simple as you state above and if that was the end of the matter, GTR woudln't be facing a very damaging legal case, and SWR wouldn't have settled their case.
I am also aware of payouts to specific passengers by companies such as Avanti.
If you choose not to take note of the issues stated above, that's your choice but if train companies do not act correctly and in accordance with the relevant rules and laws, then they can face financial concequences.
Besides the two comparisons of mistakes is not appropriate either. In the case of customer, the passenger has benefited from service they haven't paid for (whether in error or deliberate) but in the second scenario, no transaction has occurred till the fare is voluntarily accepted.
You can use terms such as "voluntarily accepted" all you want, but if the fare was higher than it should have been, then the company can face concequences. Similarly if a company reneges on terms of the contract, e.g. by denying break of journey, denying travel at advertised/published times etc.
There's no obligation on them to do that - they are supposed to offer the best ticket for the journey but not best combo of tickets.
However, if you consider this another way. Split tickets are legitimate. There are companies now making 9% of the ticket sale price (I think that was at one point the standard for retail but I can be wrong), plus splitting the tickets where they keep 15% of the difference (trainsplit for example). As a ticket retailer they are making more commission and that cut from selling a split ticket than from selling one ticket.
One man's ability to say "it can' t be done" is another man's opportunity to make money showing that it can be. A TOC's own website can choose to go full-fat on all the sales, and lose money to trainsplit, or they can choose to follow trainsplit and do it themselves.
At a certain point, though, handling a strange combination of tickets or taking a circuitous route would be too much hassle for the passenger and what they need.
I'm autistic and while I can cope with, say, buying two open returns rather than one so I can break a journey from Basingstoke to Plymouth at Exeter for the night while travelling back on the same day (and not getting caught out like last time when I bought an advance to save money then got on the wrong train and paid an excess anyway, saving precisely nothing), I would be a bit lost with trying to juggle the various constellations seen on the Advice and Policy forum. Sometimes accessibility is more simplicity rather than a complicated dot to dot puzzle. (As it happens I have a postgraduate degree and had secured a PhD place but funding fell through. I'm the classic 'absent minded professor' type -- and also work in compliance myself, albeit in healthcare.)
Navigating stations with luggage is hard enough at the best of times without adding any more complications into the equation. Commuting to work over the last ten years required some focus on getting the correct tickets, since I had variable start times over the years, but it never involved deliberately cheating the system, and although you can't go a decade without making some ticket mistakes, those were very few and far between and involved lost paper tickets and journeys bought the wrong way round. I wasn't caught, but I looked on it as a 'stupid tax' and made efforts to do it better next time.
I personally buy through the TOC app and have had no issue getting the fare I need and have never been stopped even when I had made a mistake, but really as a passenger I'm looking to pay for a journey where neither I nor the ticket office have to do complex arithmetic just to get on the right train. I buy tickets either in advance or as soon as I get on the bus to the station. I got used to having to check the times of even my regular commuter service very closely as the strikes affected the frequency for quite a considerable period of time.
In any event, though, two wrongs don't make a right. You can get on the train companies' case about fare transparency and price without that having any impact on their right to police fare evasion in a manner that's going to have an impact on people's future behaviour.
How difficult would it be for an additional field to be added to the scanning technology etc so that if a guard scanned a ticket and see one of these "genuine errors" like anytime with a railcard before 10am, he would have the opportunity to mark the customer's account as "warning given"? Then there's no penalty first time but equally no comeback if the customer is caught a second time, and then the consequences seem less excessive
How difficult would it be for an additional field to be added to the scanning technology etc so that if a guard scanned a ticket and see one of these "genuine errors" like anytime with a railcard before 10am, he would have the opportunity to mark the customer's account as "warning given"? Then there's no penalty first time but equally no comeback if the customer is caught a second time, and then the consequences seem less excessive
How difficult would it be for an additional field to be added to the scanning technology etc so that if a guard scanned a ticket and see one of these "genuine errors" like anytime with a railcard before 10am, he would have the opportunity to mark the customer's account as "warning given"? Then there's no penalty first time but equally no comeback if the customer is caught a second time, and then the consequences seem less excessive
This sort of thing would be much easier if there was a single "railway account", but there isn't, each retailer is independent of the others.
A guard certainly can endorse an e-ticket in this way for the benefit of anyone who scans it later on the same trip, either positively (please accept via X due to Y) or negatively (I already told him he shouldn't do that but he wouldn't listen), but doing it more widely isn't easily provided for at present.
This sort of thing would be much easier if there was a single "railway account", but there isn't, each retailer is independent of the others.
A guard certainly can endorse an e-ticket in this way for the benefit of anyone who scans it later on the same trip, either positively (please accept via X due to Y) or negatively (I already told him he shouldn't do that but he wouldn't listen), but doing it more widely isn't easily provided for at present.
The TTK app we use you can accept with a warning. But that's for the ticket not the account.
There is a long list for accepting the ticket and also another list for rejecting.
You can also add a comment for the reason. But again this is for the ticket not account.
There are two components to this: when do you report a passenger and when should that report be further pursued.
Purely anecdotally, people get away with consistent fare evasion far more than people who aren’t guilty of it are charged. The problem occurs when a considerable proportion of the people who are charged aren’t guilty and the majority of people who fare evade aren’t charged. The question must then be why is the railway so bad at distinguishing between the two.
Part of this is managerial. We see from many guards and RPIs on the forums that they treat e.g. a TIR/MG11 as something which gives the passenger further opportunity to explain their case, but while most of us on the forum might be able to explain cases to the railway clearly, the majority of passengers can’t. I suspect that the vast majority of MG11s end in prosecution or OCS. There is a complete disconnect of communication between the prosecutions department and frontline staff which results in different interpretations of what an MG11 and its associated comments means.
Another issue is how much responsibility the railway puts on the passenger to know what they are doing. All arguments on morality aside if instructions are clear then there is less public outrage and people have less excuses. For example in the recent case of the student being caught by the railcard time restrictions, one can put a big caution symbol in the ticket checkout screen and the e-ticket/paper ticket with the words “This ticket has special time restrictions. See [link to relevant place].” similar to how normal off peak restrictions are listed. The refusal of the railways to put in the slightest amount of effort for customer experience greatly contributes to its negative image.
Then there are the cases where the passenger has technically broken the law but leniency should be shown, e.g. railcard expiry. Ideas have been raised on the forum before of, for example, a late renewal fee of say 15 or 20 pounds if you use your railcard within 3 weeks of its expiry. Penalty fares can also be utilised more, and more consistently. Guard and RPI training also helps - those who have reviewed FOIA released RPI training materials will see that they are often very basic, cover a large amount of trivia and not so much “what is fare evasion and what is not”.
I wonder does anyone have a statistic on how many convictions there are annually for fare evasion with the different laws there are in the UK. Just trying to compare that with Germany, where around 30,000 people per year are convicted of fare evasion with intent (§265a StGB) with around 1,000 people jailed for it (usually when they can't pay the court fine)
Yesterday traveled home from Bristol Temple Meads. Unusually I had an Advance ticket, and when I got to the gateline it was rejected. The guy looked at the ticket and said the date was incorrect. He was right. I’d bought a ticket for the wrong date. Had the gateline been open, as it was a little later, I’d have boarded the train without realising my ticket was invalid. And then, if the ticket had been checked, I’d potentially have been in line for a time-consuming and costly dialog to remedy the situation.
Thankfully it didn’t get that far but it still cost me. I had to sort out a valid ticket (not massively expensive thanks to Cross Country’s short-notice Advances!), and while I was doing that I missed the train I wanted to catch so I was an hour later than planned getting home. I was annoyed with myself: annoyed that a moment of my carelessness had cost me. But no where near as angry as I’d have been with myself if I’d travelled with an invalid ticket and been found out, because that could have cost me much more. Lesson learned: I shall check my tickets more carefully in future.
Innocent mistake? Yes. First time? Yes. Would I have explained to anyone checking the ticket and asked for leniency? Yes. But had they gone the book and reported me, I would have accepted it was my mistake, taken personal responsibility, and sucked up the ramifications - even if it ended up with a conviction. I would not have started whinging about whether the system is unfair on people who make one-off mistakes.
Insane level of being locked-in to an opinion, willingly and enthusiastically being criminalised for getting the date wrong on your ticket. Kudos for going so far down the metaphorical rabbit hole to justify your opinions so far.
Yesterday traveled home from Bristol Temple Meads. Unusually I had an Advance ticket, and when I got to the gateline it was rejected. The guy looked at the ticket and said the date was incorrect. He was right. I’d bought a ticket for the wrong date. Had the gateline been open, as it was a little later, I’d have boarded the train without realising my ticket was invalid. And then, if the ticket had been checked, I’d potentially have been in line for a time-consuming and costly dialog to remedy the situation.
Thankfully it didn’t get that far but it still cost me. I had to sort out a valid ticket (not massively expensive thanks to Cross Country’s short-notice Advances!), and while I was doing that I missed the train I wanted to catch so I was an hour later than planned getting home. I was annoyed with myself: annoyed that a moment of my carelessness had cost me. But no where near as angry as I’d have been with myself if I’d travelled with an invalid ticket and been found out, because that could have cost me much more. Lesson learned: I shall check my tickets more carefully in future.
Innocent mistake? Yes. First time? Yes. Would I have explained to anyone checking the ticket and asked for leniency? Yes. But had they gone the book and reported me, I would have accepted it was my mistake, taken personal responsibility, and sucked up the ramifications - even if it ended up with a conviction. I would not have started whinging about how unfair the system is to people who make one-off mistakes.
No, I don’t think it warrants a criminal conviction - not for a first offence anyway. Campaigning for change is one thing. But given what we have, I do accept responsibility for complying with the rules of the system and I accept that the ramifications of not doing so is my own problem and not anyone else’s.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Insane level of being locked-in to an opinion, willingly and enthusiastically being criminalised for getting the date wrong on your ticket. Kudos for going so far down the metaphorical rabbit hole to justify your opinions so far.
There’s no metaphor involved: I really did mess up my ticket yesterday. And I consider myself lucky being snagged at the gateline. But how does anyone but me know I made an innocent mistake? I could have been trying it on because I’d noticed the tickets for a different date were cheaper. Where do you draw the line? How do you draw a line unless you check the history of the passengers involved in each anomaly?
No, I don’t think it warrants a criminal conviction - not for a first offence anyway. Campaigning for change is one thing. But given what we have, I do accept responsibility for complying with the rules of the system and I accept that the ramifications of not doing so is my own problem and not anyone else’s.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There’s no metaphor involved: I really did mess up my ticket yesterday. And I consider myself lucky being snagged at the gateline. But how does anyone but me know I made an innocent mistake? I could have been trying it on because I’d noticed the tickets for a different date were cheaper. Where do you draw the line? How do you draw a line unless you check the history of the passengers involved in each anomaly?
As I said, if you want to campaign for change go ahead. I’m not sure what the alternative is though. Its impossible for a bystander to tell an innocent mistake from a deliberate attempt to avoid paying what’s due. Fare evasion loses the industry and the nation millions, and it needs to be reduced. The only two ways of doing so are more rigorous pre-travel checking and disincentives in the form of harsh penalties. The side effect of the former is greater cost (gateline staff, barriers, etc) while the latter means genuine first-time mistakes may be penalised.
But its not the industry that makes the law - its government legislation. I’m sure the industry has been told to be strict on enforcement as a means of reducing evasion and increasing income, so I suspect little will change while there’s such a huge hole in the country’s finances. And while you’re campaigning, I’ll focus on ensuring I comply with the law, and I’ll accept its my own problem if I don’t comply.
As I said, if you want to campaign for change go ahead. I’m not sure what the alternative is though. Its impossible for a bystander to tell an innocent mistake from a deliberate attempt to avoid paying what’s due.
The only two ways of doing so are more rigorous pre-travel checking and disincentives in the form of harsh penalties. The side effect of the former is greater cost (gateline staff, barriers, etc) while the latter means genuine first-time mistakes may be penalised.
It's not a binary choice. Also your harsh approach is not possible in Scotland. Do you think the revenue loss in Scotland is a lot higher than in England? (I doubt it).
True the Government needs to take a big chunk of the blame here; the whole system is rotten to the core, and Government run TOCs like Northern, TPE and LNER are among the worsr offenders.
I’m sure the industry has been told to be strict on enforcement as a means of reducing evasion and increasing income, so I suspect little will change while there’s such a huge hole in the country’s finances. And while you’re campaigning, I’ll focus on ensuring I comply with the law, and I’ll accept its my own problem if I don’t comply.
No, I don’t think it warrants a criminal conviction - not for a first offence anyway. Campaigning for change is one thing. But given what we have, I do accept responsibility for complying with the rules of the system and I accept that the ramifications of not doing so is my own problem and not anyone else’s.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There’s no metaphor involved: I really did mess up my ticket yesterday. And I consider myself lucky being snagged at the gateline. But how does anyone but me know I made an innocent mistake? I could have been trying it on because I’d noticed the tickets for a different date were cheaper. Where do you draw the line? How do you draw a line unless you check the history of the passengers involved in each anomaly?
But if the ticket you purchased said ‘anytime’ and the ticket conditions on the reverse said ‘use at any time’ and the discounts section said ‘yes-railacrds can be used’ would you have been confused in any way?
I didn’t say that. Mistakes the contravene legislation are criminal matters. In every aspect of life, it is our responsibility to understand what is legal and what is not, and accept that when we do something that contravenes law there are consequences. Surely you wouldn’t want to argue [for example] that someone who MISTAKENLY believed they could drink five pints of beer and drive a car should be treated leniently?
Does it really? Do you mean overcharging or charging [in your view] too much? If passengers are being overcharged then yes there should be some form of retribution, but its not criminal [law] to charge a passenger more than he minimum they needed to pay. If you just think fares are too expensive then I think some rail fares are too high, but I also accept there’s not much I can do about it (and not much anyone with any influence will do about it). So I just get creative with split fares and the like, which is an option open to anyone who’s prepared to do a little bit of legwork and doesn’t expect everything to be handed to them on a plate.
It's not a binary choice. Also your harsh approach is not possible in Scotland. Do you think the revenue loss in Scotland is a lot higher than in England? (I doubt it).
I doubt the Scots are inherently more honest than the English or the Welsh, so if the penalties are less severe and there is no more pre-departure checking taking place, I suspect the level of fare evasion in Scotland as a proportion of overall revenue take is at least as high if not higher than elsewhere.
Indeed I didn’t focus enough - and as I said I will be somewhat more careful in future. I accept I was lucky and while I agree the consequences could have been rather harsh, I would have accepted personal responsibility for the mistake and whatever the fallout from it would have been had I not been so lucky.
You still haven‘t said what you think the solution is. How do you reduce fare evasion without drastically increasing operating costs or imposing harsh sanctions on those who do not pay the correct amount?
I didn’t say that. Mistakes the contravene legislation are criminal matters. In every aspect of life, it is our responsibility to understand what is legal and what is not, and accept that when we do something that contravenes law there are consequences.
Surely you wouldn’t want to argue [for example] that someone who MISTAKENLY believed they could drink five pints of beer and drive a car should be treated leniently?
Absolutely; ; for example have you heard of the Boundary Zone extension claim, or the GTR branding claim? These are just two very specific issues relating to specific TOCs and are a tiny proportion of the overall overcharges that will be going on across the entire network. Do you have an idea how much those claims alone are worth, in terms of overcharge?
If passengers are being overcharged then yes there should be some form of retribution, but its not criminal [law] to charge a passenger more than he minimum they needed to pay.
If you just think fares are too expensive then I think some rail fares are too high, but I also accept there’s not much I can do about it (and not much anyone with any influence will do about it). So I just get creative with split fares and the like, which is an option open to anyone who’s prepared to do a little bit of legwork and doesn’t expect everything to be handed to them on a plate.
No need to do any legwork; our website hands it to people on a plate.
That said, buying a ticket and travelling in accordance with the itinerary is no guarantee that a TOC won't attempt to charge an additional fare or prosecute; TOCs get up to all sorts of tricks.
I doubt the Scots are inherently more honest than the English or the Welsh, so if the penalties are less severe and there is no more pre-departure checking taking place, I suspect the level of fare evasion in Scotland as a proportion of revenue take is at least as high if not higher than elsewhere.
Indeed I didn’t focus enough - and as I said I will be somewhat more careful in future. I accept I was lucky and while I agree the consequences could have been rather harsh, I would have accepted personal responsibility for the mistake and whatever the fallout from it would have been had I not been so lucky.
You still haven‘t said what you think the solution is. How do you reduce fare evasion without drastically increasing operating costs or imposing harsh sanctions on those who do not pay the correct amount?
There is no onus on me to come up with a "solution"; what do you think the solution is? Criminalise everyone who makes a mistake who isn't stopped by a gateline?
But if the ticket you purchased said ‘anytime’ and the ticket conditions on the reverse said ‘use at any time’ and the discounts section said ‘yes-railacrds can be used’ would you have been confused in any way?
I wonder does anyone have a statistic on how many convictions there are annually for fare evasion with the different laws there are in the UK. Just trying to compare that with Germany, where around 30,000 people per year are convicted of fare evasion with intent (§265a StGB) with around 1,000 people jailed for it (usually when they can't pay the court fine)
We know that TfL alone prosecutes about 20,000 a year, so the number for England and Wales is going to be proportionately a lot higher since Scotland and Northern Ireland follow different legal processes and there are very few prosecutions there. In theory no-one goes to jail for not paying the court fine, normally fines can be extracted from payroll or benefits via court order, failing that a bailiff's warrant. There may be the odd exception somewhere in the system and jail remains a theoretical outcome in terms of punishment. I'm told that a fair chunk of TfL's 20k can't actually be recovered since a relatively high proportion end up as untraceable.
I think there should a materiality and intent overlay in this area, as there is with shoplifting and petty theft. Giving thousands of young people a criminal record for pathetically small sums of money isn't the sort of society I would want to live in, particularly since I strong suspect that ethnic minorities are unduly targeted. By all means make an example of those who cheat the system with intent and at scale, but everyone else should be penalty fared and / or handled via the civilian county court system. It just suits the rail companies to prosecute privately rather than invest in their IT, staffing and infrastructure to reduce the chance of evasion.
A few examples, I'm intrigued as to how other people think these should be handled:
1) Passenger presents advance ticket for a long distance journey, involving a change of train, valid for the following day. Passenger insists he needs to travel now to visit a relative in hospital (be original please ), but is unable to purchase another ticket. Warn him, but allow him to travel, on the basis that he should have to present his ticket again for the main leg of the journey. Passenger then leaves the train at a different station, not served by the operator or trains to the destination on the ticket.
2) Passenger approaches guard before boarding a very busy service in the middle of the PM peak. "I've got a ticket for the next train, but can I get on now?". Ticket is actually an advance for the train two hours later. Guard refuses. Passenger attempts to gain sympathy by claiming both that his boss bought his ticket and that he's finished work early and wants to get home. Guard still refuses. What if he had boarded without asking the guard and then been checked on the train?
3) Passenger presents guard with an advance ticket. Different TOC. Different time. Different day(!). Different route (same origin and destination). Told to buy new ticket. Refuses to pay that price. Tries to buy new ticket online - still an advance (and therefore still for the wrong time), still for the wrong TOC, still for the wrong route.
4) Another advance. Wrong TOC. Wrong time. Wrong route. "My friend bought it for me".
5) Railcard discounted ticket. No Railcard. "I am new here. My friend bought it for me".
6) Any number of the "pay when challenged" brigade, who regularly board busy services (in a penalty fares area) to travel one stop, knowing there's a very high chance that the guard won't get to them.
7) Advance ticket. Correct route. 4 hours early. "I just thought I'd catch an earlier train, I didn't want to wait".
), but is unable to purchase another ticket. Warn him, but allow him to travel, on the basis that he should have to present his ticket again for the main leg of the journey. Passenger then leaves the train at a different station, not served by the operator or trains to the destination on the ticket.