Mattplans
Member
Agreed. Especially with the same TfL investigators
-
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!
A New Series of "Fare Dodgers At War With the Law..."
- Thread starter Blinkbonny
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Buzby
Established Member
Series? Every program is repetitive in that we supposedly don’t have the attention span to follow a complete case, so it is split into mini segments. I gave up half-way through the first series.
Blinkbonny
Member
- Joined
- 16 Mar 2018
- Messages
- 410
Especially given the obligatory stake-outs that come to nothing!
Don't know why they can't just cut to the chase.
Brightonboy
Member
I get frustrated with the fact that some of the fare dodgers are quite clearly well aware of what they are doing and just don't care.
What I do find interesting is to compare those fare dodgers with shop lifters. In both cases individuals are obtaining goods or services with no intention of paying for them, SWR, TfL & NET clearly take steps to investigate and challenge the individuals, involving the police and courts when necessary whereas, as has been well publicised, the police are often not interested in shoplifters and even shop staff who challenge them appear 'unsupported'. Are the transport companies 'overdoing' their enforcement or are shops and the police 'underdoing' their response to shoplifters? (I know what I think, but I'm an old f**t what woz brought up proper!
)
What I do find interesting is to compare those fare dodgers with shop lifters. In both cases individuals are obtaining goods or services with no intention of paying for them, SWR, TfL & NET clearly take steps to investigate and challenge the individuals, involving the police and courts when necessary whereas, as has been well publicised, the police are often not interested in shoplifters and even shop staff who challenge them appear 'unsupported'. Are the transport companies 'overdoing' their enforcement or are shops and the police 'underdoing' their response to shoplifters? (I know what I think, but I'm an old f**t what woz brought up proper!
)
Fiyero
Member
He got a £40 fine, £275 compensation and £275 costs. Hopefully some kind of criminal record too otherwise that seems like a good discount anyway!
Nottingham tram revenue protection are shown claiming they are entitled to demand ID (not clear what sort). Furthermore, they are shown claiming not doing so will change the situation from civil to criminal. The bye laws only appear to require a person to give name and address, same as National Rail. Do any here know the truth of these claims ?
You almost certainly get a criminal record even if you plead guilty.
Have to admit, NET's customers seem to be way more aggressive and brazen compared to TfL and SWR customers.
Wouldn't be the first time revenue protection have managed to give a national audience via this TV show to their dubious practices. Shame that no-one is willing to take action about it.
Alpine Rider
Member
So this is not relevant ...
Under UK National Rail Byelaws and the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, if you are found traveling without a valid ticket, authorized railway staff or revenue protection officers can legally require you to provide your name and address.
While they cannot physically search you or act as police, refusing to provide your details—or giving false information—is a separate criminal offense that can carry a fine of up to £1,000 and lead to police involvement.
Under UK National Rail Byelaws and the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, if you are found traveling without a valid ticket, authorized railway staff or revenue protection officers can legally require you to provide your name and address.
While they cannot physically search you or act as police, refusing to provide your details—or giving false information—is a separate criminal offense that can carry a fine of up to £1,000 and lead to police involvement.
No mention there of producing ID. People in the UK are not required to carry ID on their person.
They also cannot demand you give ID.
Mcr Warrior
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 17,161
Or date of birth information? Fairly sure that was being asked for.
They can ask for it but you are under no legal right to tell them. The relevant bylaws on NET only make provision for name and address.
AI slop is rarely accurate.
ctom_s
Member
I'm still not 100% clear on the date of birth situation, it seems some are saying you never need to give it and some say it depends on the specific policies of the company involved/type of offence suspected? (Apologies if I'm misunderstanding)
You are legally required to provide your date of birth if you are issued with a Penalty Fare by a National Rail operator in England, or on the Tyne & Wear Metro, since that is a requirement under regulation 13 of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018.
You aren't required to provide your date of birth to rail staff under other circumstances. For example if you're issued with a Penalty Fare by TfL, by TfW in Wales, or if your details are taken for potential prosecution by any operator.
The police would have that power if they arrest you but they typically do not get involved in routine revenue checks.
tram21
Established Member
They get involved in joint operations with NET once a month. This includes revenue and also crime prevention.
eoff
Member
I was watching a programme in the last few days which I assume was this one.
The investigation team were talking to someone they belived was using a relative's pass.
What I found interesting that they were telling the person multiple times that he had a choice of going with them for a cosy interview to discuss the issues or they woud call the scary police.
I was wondering if the police option was better, as presumably they would just verify identity and tell the person to go on his way?
The investigation team were talking to someone they belived was using a relative's pass.
What I found interesting that they were telling the person multiple times that he had a choice of going with them for a cosy interview to discuss the issues or they woud call the scary police.
I was wondering if the police option was better, as presumably they would just verify identity and tell the person to go on his way?
ctom_s
Member
Given they have no powers of detention I'm under the impression they could say they're going for the police option but you can just walk off before the police came as long as you've given your name and address (unless the Police were literally right there)
Last edited:
Ashley Hill
Established Member
As one chap did leaving the inspector pointlessly shouting “excuse me” as if he’d come back!
STINT47
Member
If your asked to stop and refuse then the inspectors could make a citizens arrest and use reasonable force to detain people until the police arrive.
I enjoy this for the internal insight it provides, but somewhat wonder if this programme is less effective at deterring evasion and more effective at showing people how to evade.
I can imagine people thinking "well, it took £2000 of evasion for this person to appear on TfL's radar, I'm good to do it occasionally". Plus, evasion methods that can be avoided if a revenue block is noticed, and this programme shows exactly what they look like.
I can imagine people thinking "well, it took £2000 of evasion for this person to appear on TfL's radar, I'm good to do it occasionally". Plus, evasion methods that can be avoided if a revenue block is noticed, and this programme shows exactly what they look like.
slicedbread
Member
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 52
Citizens arrests law is not simple but broadly only available if someone is committing an indictable offence, so something serious enough to potentially land you in crown court.
Probably not going to be available for not giving your name and address for fare evasion.
strawbrick
Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 79
Watching a couple of programmes in this new series and most of the previous one, has raised a few queries which hopefully someone can answer. (Whilst they are in no particular order I have numbered them for ease of reference future reference.):
- If I heard correctly, TfL loose several hundred million a year to fare dodging. How much would this be reduced by if TfL employed say 200 more Revenue Protection Officers?
- Why do TfL allow a fare dodger to operate for nearly a year and evade several thousands of pounds before trying to catch them?
- Do they validate the addresses they are given against the Post Codes?
- How does sight of a Bank or Credit Card prove your identity and your address?
- Why does a cancelled / invalid card allow you to tap in and then out without hindrance?
- Do the various TOCs have the same fare tracking systems as TfL? If not, why not? (I appreciate they may not have not he same level of CCTV.)
- Given the problems they have when the RPOs go to a major station, e.g. Waterloo, why are BTP not automatically present to stop the "runners"?
- If a fare dodger is prosecuted and found guilty do TfL recover the unpaid fares?
- What action can be taken against repeat recipients of Penalty Fares?
- Assuming that "short farers" have an entry ticket for a short trip from their home station and an exit ticket bought on the train to their destination, can the TOC put thw two halves together and identify them?
Wallsendmag
Established Member
I was wondering about 5 surely that's not right and if it is why?
The answer is it doesn't. A blocked card only allows you to tap out, so people entering stations reach around on exit gates and tap "out" but walk into the system. It's done the rounds on brainrot Tiktok for a few years.
Egg Centric
Established Member
I think you get 3 goes before it's blocked don't you? In the sense it can be an invalid card from the bank's point of view, but not blacklisted on TfL yet.
ctom_s
Member
That's what I've heard yes, but clearly something is being missed since in the mini snippet I've seen (unfortunately abroad ATM and can't watch) from the show showed someone using their uncles card which had no money on it and had racked up a debt of 2k. I do vaguely remember asking a similar in the fare advice or disputes channel a long time ago, and basically got told not to pry because any information given might fall into the wrong hands.
I may have misremembered the snippet but there definitely seems to be a way people can tap in cards that are somehow faulty (NOT blocked cards) hundreds of times without them being blocked that tfl can't seem to do anything about.
I know some of the cases shown are the tiktok scam where they get in the system somehow and then are let out but I don't think that's the whole story
I may have misremembered the snippet but there definitely seems to be a way people can tap in cards that are somehow faulty (NOT blocked cards) hundreds of times without them being blocked that tfl can't seem to do anything about.
I know some of the cases shown are the tiktok scam where they get in the system somehow and then are let out but I don't think that's the whole story
Last edited:
Mcr Warrior
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 17,161
Having viewed last night's latest episode, the Nottingham trams system looks as if it's an challenging environment of an evening.