Best way to stop fare evasion

[Pompey00]

I don't disagree with this. My point is that the staff carrying out those inspections need to be well qualified to do that. It's a minority, but unfortunately there are gateline staff who simply do not understand the ticketing system or how to provide basic customer service, presumably because of a failure on the part of the TOC to train them adequately. And if it isn't done properly, a move to vastly increase the number of inspections in a short space of time risks exacerbating this issue and thus doing more harm than good.

You say that but a lot revenue are getting lazy and not taking their job seriously and just letting them off.

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

I’m sorry, but if they missed all the signs both by the side of the road and on the roads themselves, then either their eyesight is too poor to drive or they were paying insufficient attention to drive.



of course. But after the third time and a £5k fine, most will surely think again. For those that don’t there’s no hope regardless of the penalty.

True but doubt they’d ever do it.

 

[185143]

I’m sorry, but if they missed all the signs both by the side of the road and on the roads themselves, then either their eyesight is too poor to drive or they were paying insufficient attention to drive.

Must have been Dominic Cummings on his was back from the North East!

 

[Peter Sarf]

I’m sorry, but if they missed all the signs both by the side of the road and on the roads themselves, then either their eyesight is too poor to drive or they were paying insufficient attention to drive.



of course. But after the third time and a £5k fine, most will surely think again. For those that don’t there’s no hope regardless of the penalty.

I know what you mean but the big letter C is just meaningless to anyone from the sticks. Personally I find the number of things to look out for rather daunting these days. In the days when bus lanes used to have times I would stay out all the time as I often was not sure I read the detail so was never sure enough. I had friends who slipped up thinking they knew the times.

I prefer to spend my time looking out for other vehicles (front, side and rear), pedestrians and checking my speed. Then there are pot holes.

Having just come back from Cardiff I noticed big multicoloured patches on the road past the castle - step son told me to ignore them. So what else can I ignore. Then there are the old road markings that led me to believe I had just exited the end of a bus lane !. And on the coach I saw signs that were hard to read even though I was not driving - some behind trees others in two languages which feel like they take much more than twice as long to read !. Something I have realised is I suffer from effectively tunnel vision - I have rather long arms and legs so sit a long way back. I realise some signs have disappeared above the windscreen before I have time to read them. Made worse if they are round a corner.

My priority is safety of me, my passengers and other road users. I find the penalties rather over the top. In the case of ticketing I think there is a risk that there could be a backlash regarding fares if nt enforced carefully. On the other hand there are those who routinely never buy a ticket and something along the lines of rising penalties for persistent offenders is completely justifiable. For example I commuted with someone who NEVER bought a ticket. They just coughed up if a ticket check was done.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I know what you mean but the big letter C is just meaningless to anyone from the sticks.

TFL's website shows the signs at https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/congestion-charge/congestion-charge-zone/road-signs, and I note that the sign which is shown 'near or at the start of the zone' includes the words 'Congestion charging' and 'Central zone' as well as the 'C' logo.

It seems to be a principle of British road signing that drivers are expected to be able to read (otherwise how do 'Flood' signs work) so I'm not sure how someone from 'the sticks' is not being informed about the congestion charging zone.

 

[AlterEgo]

I know what you mean but the big letter C is just meaningless to anyone from the sticks.

No excuse; it’s in the Highway Code as an information sign.

 

[SynthD]

I know what you mean but the big letter C is just meaningless to anyone from the sticks.

To get from the sticks to the zone drivers pass signs like this on the M4. Large sign saying congestion charge ahead in 12 miles.

 

[Starmill]

I wrote this many years ago, but to me the answer is simple, albeit with controversial elements:

1) You must have a valid ticket before boarding a train, without exception
2) There must be an opportunity to buy a ticket at every station, located obviously at the entrance(s) to the station building or platform. Ticket machines card only to reduce the need for staff to visit
3) Clear signage and occasional announcements to this effect must be present at the station and on the train
4) Increased ticket checks on trains; on all long distance services sufficient to check every ticket on every train, on local / regional services sufficient to check 50% of passengers boarding at unbarriered stations, and 10% of passengers at barriered stations.
5) £100 fine for invalid ticket
6) £500 fine for second offence in a rolling 2 years
7) £5000 fine for third offence in a rolling 2 years
8) independent appeals process (like the Parking fines appeals process)
9) a high level of training for all revenue inspectors, in particular how to use ‘discretion’ appropriately.
10) two years notice of the above process being implemented, with plenty of publicity.

end of sermon.

I’m sure many will challenge much of this!

I think that it would be very difficult to challenge any of the underlying principles you've raised as they're reasonable and sensible and align with similar processes elsewhere.

The problem would be that your plan just can't be put into practice without both more ticket vending machines and significantly more staff. These would, of course, be subject to business case. Both are justifiable in principle, but are also costly interventions. And you know as well as I do that it would be very difficult to persuade anyone to accept the large risk that these additional staff and ticket machines would cost more than the additional revenue collected, especially because you're proposing a much longer training course for the staff than bare bones basics some currently have today.

Would your plan necccesarily require the current contracted out revenue staff to move in-house (and thus become represented, probably by RMT)? Also, would your plan look to install ticket gates at the busiest locations which still don't have them e.g. Wilmslow, Durham, Eastleigh, Worcester Foregate Street, Warrington Bank Quay, Stafford, York, Sheffield, Manchester Piccadilly*? If so, of course those would need lots of work. I'm unsure how many staff would be needed to gate every entrance at York, other than it would be an awful lot.

You could advance the argument that even if you achieved only very poor value for money, because too many of the current fare evaders simply don't travel by train at all as a result of the new measures, it would be better not to have those customers. I personally might even be sympathetic to that argument. But would whoever you persuaded to pay for the extra staff, ticket gates and ticket machines be sympathetic?

* there are ticket gates but you can simply walk around them.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I think that it would be very difficult to challenge any of the underlying principles you've raised as they're reasonable and sensible and align with similar processes elsewhere.

The problem would be that your plan just can't be put into practice without both more ticket vending machines and significantly more staff. These would, of course, be subject to business case. Both are justifiable in principle, but are also costly interventions. And you know as well as I do that it would be very difficult to persuade anyone to accept the large risk that these additional staff and ticket machines would cost more than the additional revenue collected. You could advance the argument that even if you achieved only very poor value for money, because too many of the current fare evaders simply don't travel by train at all as a result of the measures, it would be better not to have those customers. I personally might even be sympathetic to that argument. But would whoever you persuaded to pay for the extra staff and ticket machines be sympathetic?

I would add to the equation though the possibility that extra checks etc might eliminate undesirable types from travelling. I know of people who say (excuse ?) they avoid public transport because "you don't know who you are sharing with". I have witnessed trouble from people who do not wish to pay but I refuse to let it put me off.

 

[Starmill]

I would add to the equation though the possibility that extra checks etc might eliminate undesirable types from travelling. I know of people who say (excuse ?) they avoid public transport because "you don't know who you are sharing with". I have witnessed trouble from people who do not wish to pay but I refuse to let it put me off.

Good point. I've now edited my post to incorporate this.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Would your plan necccesarily require the current contracted out revenue staff to move in-house (and thus become represented, probably by RMT)? Also, would your plan look to install ticket gates at the busiest locations which still don't have them e.g. Wilmslow, Durham, Eastleigh, Worcester Foregate Street, Warrington Bank Quay, Stafford, York, Sheffield, Manchester Piccadilly*? If so, of course those would need lots of work. I'm unsure how many staff would be needed to gate every entrance at York, other than it would be an awful lot.

* there are ticket gates but you can simply walk around them.

I could swear Durham had the same flimsy transparent gates as at Wakefield Westgate and Manchester Victoria last time I visited.

*You can't really, due to the (unbearable) individuals standing at each non-gated platform entrances as if they were bouncers, and they really don't give up easily.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I could swear Durham had the same flimsy transparent gates as at Wakefield Westgate and Manchester Victoria last time I visited.

The ones at Manchester Victoria don't feel particularly flimsy to me, but each to their own I suppose.

Having said which, how much more effective would barriers which are impassable without a valid ticket be compared to the current 'flimsy' ones? My best guess is that there's not going to be much difference: 'flimsy' gates cannot be avoided by accident so it seems to me that they will eliminate casual fare dodging - anyone still not showing a ticket must surely know that they are doing (in the railway's opinion) wrong. Impassable barriers would presumably also eliminate deliberate fare-dodging, but at what added cost of installation, and with what unquantifiable impacts on safety (emergency evacuation) and the look of stations?

 

[Bald Rick]

The problem would be that your plan just can't be put into practice without both more ticket vending machines and significantly more staff.

Vending machines, yes, although I’d argue buying and installing perhaps a thousand of the same type, card only, shouldn’t cost more than about £30m.

I would argue about the more staff bit. There’s plenty of staff out there already doing this (or similar) as part of their current job, many of whom are currently used unproductively, and could be ’refocused’ to doing this.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Vending machines, yes, although I’d argue buying and installing perhaps a thousand of the same type, card only, shouldn’t cost more than about £30m.

I would argue about the more staff bit. There’s plenty of staff out there already doing this (or similar) as part of their current job, many of whom are currently used unproductively, and could be ’refocused’ to doing this.

Good point. I think having any staff checking tickets in their free time could add a layer of unpredictably frequent ticket checks that would make life harder for the fare dodger.

 

[Starmill]

Vending machines, yes, although I’d argue buying and installing perhaps a thousand of the same type, card only, shouldn’t cost more than about £30m.

I would argue about the more staff bit. There’s plenty of staff out there already doing this (or similar) as part of their current job, many of whom are currently used unproductively, and could be ’refocused’ to doing this.

Is it realistic to change the roles of those staff without the cost of an industrial dispute though? And what about the costs of bringing the agency staff in house, doing re-training, and revisiting ticket gate placement?

Add it all up and you won't find anyone willing to take on that level of risk over your multi-year programme.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Is it realistic to change the roles of those staff without the cost of an industrial dispute though? And what about the costs of bringing the agency staff in house, doing re-training, and revisiting ticket gate placement?

Add it all up and you won't find anyone willing to take on that level of risk over your multi-year programme.

It is a pity the railways cannot be flexible especially when staring at falling passenger numbers.

 

[Starmill]

I could swear Durham had the same flimsy transparent gates as at Wakefield Westgate and Manchester Victoria last time I visited.

*You can't really, due to the (unbearable) individuals standing at each non-gated platform entrances as if they were bouncers, and they really don't give up easily.

Durham had S&B ticket gates which you describe installed in 2009. They were removed in 2017. The same happened at Newark North Gate and Grantham.

At Manchester Piccadilly it's very rare for every entrance to be blocked by staff. Regardless of that however, the ticket gates specifically were what I was asking about. It's very rare for a station to have gates which you can just walk around by a non-gated route. Sittingbourne is the only other example that comes to mind.

 

[Bald Rick]

Is it realistic to change the roles of those staff without the cost of an industrial dispute though?

You might have noticed we are in a drawn out industrial dispute already, May as well get some benefit from it!

 

[gnolife]

Durham had S&B ticket gates which you describe installed in 2009. They were removed in 2017. The same happened at Newark North Gate and Grantham.

At Manchester Piccadilly it's very rare for every entrance to be blocked by staff. Regardless of that however, the ticket gates specifically were what I was asking about. It's very rare for a station to have gates which you can just walk around by a non-gated route. Sittingbourne is the only other example that comes to mind.

Glasgow Central P11-15 and the low level has a lift to bypass the barriers

 

[BJames]

Durham had S&B ticket gates which you describe installed in 2009. They were removed in 2017. The same happened at Newark North Gate and Grantham.

At Manchester Piccadilly it's very rare for every entrance to be blocked by staff. Regardless of that however, the ticket gates specifically were what I was asking about. It's very rare for a station to have gates which you can just walk around by a non-gated route. Sittingbourne is the only other example that comes to mind.

I've only ever been to Piccadilly twice but was in a hurry both times so didn't get a proper chance for a look around - I'm not sure what this non-gated route is - is this similar to Nottingham in that if you just use the Station Street entrance you would get round the gateline, or in that there is actually a non-gated route pretty obviously right by the actual gateline?

 

[Starmill]

I've only ever been to Piccadilly twice but was in a hurry both times so didn't get a proper chance for a look around - I'm not sure what this non-gated route is - is this similar to Nottingham in that if you just use the Station Street entrance you would get round the gateline, or in that there is actually a non-gated route pretty obviously right by the actual gateline?

Oh yes, Nottingham is another example.

At Manchester Piccadilly there's an entrance on platform 1 and another on platform 12 via the lift from the taxi rank which are ungated and lead into the 'paid' side. Neither have a ticket machine at them either. They're usually unstaffed.

There's also platforms 8 - 12 which do not have gates from the main concourse as 1-7 do. These are usually staffed, except for 12 which is usually only staffed when a train is about to arrive.

 

[Kite159]

Durham had S&B ticket gates which you describe installed in 2009. They were removed in 2017. The same happened at Newark North Gate and Grantham.

At Manchester Piccadilly it's very rare for every entrance to be blocked by staff. Regardless of that however, the ticket gates specifically were what I was asking about. It's very rare for a station to have gates which you can just walk around by a non-gated route. Sittingbourne is the only other example that comes to mind.

Rainham in Kent & Cheshunt also spring to mind as they have side gates for disabled access but most of the time I've passed the gate has been wide open.

Can't recall seeing an open entrance at Sittingbourne, but I might not have been looking for it

 

[Sm5]

Curiously though some of the fares most avoided* are of relatively low value.


* I have no statistical evidence but from reports by staff in areas such as S Wales, Merseyside and Manchester a lot of fare evasion is for trifling sums.

Thats probabky why they evade them… they think well if I get caught i’ll just buy a ticket and everything will be ok.

 

[Starmill]

Rainham in Kent & Cheshunt also spring to mind as they have side gates for disabled access but most of the time I've passed the gate has been wide open.

Can't recall seeing an open entrance at Sittingbourne, but I might not have been looking for it

Whoops! I thought Rainham and wrote Sittingbourne! Sorry haha.

 

[greyman42]

I'm unsure how many staff would be needed to gate every entrance at York, other than it would be an awful lot.

Planning permission for ticket barriers at York was refused a number of years ago.

 

[Starmill]

Planning permission for ticket barriers at York was refused a number of years ago.

Indeed. And a similar issue arose when Sheffield City Council objected to their blocking of the bridge at Sheffield station.

All solvable, potentially, but at what cost?

 

[MisterSheeps]

Make it free

Would never happen, politically, but worth considering ... if you got rid of TVMs, ticket offices, RPIs, and the rest of the nonsense, and moved to DOO, i wonder what the difference would be between that saving & the fare loss?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Would never happen, politically, but worth considering ... if you got rid of TVMs, ticket offices, RPIs, and the rest of the nonsense, and moved to DOO, i wonder what the difference would be between that saving & the fare loss?

You'd still have an enormous fare loss. Luxembourg can make it work being its size. The UK couldn't, sadly. Not unless taxes were doubled at a minimum!

 

[Bald Rick]

Would never happen, politically, but worth considering ... if you got rid of TVMs, ticket offices, RPIs, and the rest of the nonsense, and moved to DOO, i wonder what the difference would be between that saving & the fare loss?

About £8bn a year, and that assumes that there would be no need to provide extra capacity (at extra cost) for the extra passengers such a policy would encourage.

 

[ComUtoR]

Would never happen, politically, but worth considering ... if you got rid of TVMs, ticket offices, RPIs, and the rest of the nonsense, and moved to DOO, i wonder what the difference would be between that saving & the fare loss?

You could get rid of EVERYTHING fare related. Delay repay would go and the entire teams behind the compensation machine, you would get rid of thousands up on thousands of hours that go into ticketing, fare management, orcats, etc. Gatelines could also be non existent. Star/Avantix machines would disappear, Posters, announcements, etc. We would lose an entire sub section of the forum because travel is free so no more disputes, legal costs, or time wasted sending letters back and forth. I reckon the legal cost alone is worth maybe around..... £8bn...

You'd still have an enormous fare loss. Luxembourg can make it work being its size. The UK couldn't, sadly. Not unless taxes were doubled at a minimum!

Why not raise taxes accordingly ? When I get my council tax through I have a list of local services that I have to pay for. IF there is a genuine desire and indeed belief that the railway is a public service then why not pay for it as such ? Why not have everyone pay through their council tax and have the local services free ? My kids get a Zip card which allows them free travel on buses and trams. Old folk get a freedom pass which also provides free travel. Where I live I get a residents pass for a local river crossing for a small nominal fee.

About £8bn a year,

Meh, all part of the insane money-go-round. Imagine a true public service transport system.

and that assumes that there would be no need to provide extra capacity (at extra cost) for the extra passengers such a policy would encourage.

I think your in your usual overstatement mood. Triggered much........

I don't believe that there would be a need for that much extra capacity. In the early days it would be a novelty to go places for free and yeah, I'll happily concede that there would be a spike in demand. *BUT the rail network, and the transport network in general, runs on need.



It's a captive market. You aren't going to have more kids suddenly getting a train to school because its free. Most don't take the train because they are using other means to get to school. Again, I will accept there would be a small uptake with some parents who couldn't previously afford it now making the switch but that will be a benefit overall. Same with those commuting, Do you really believe that people are suddenly going to switch from their normal method to commuting by train ? People commute for a reason, and that is most often because they HAVE to. Leisure travel would be interesting. There would be an economic benefit here for sure. I know many people who don't go into town because it costs a fortune in travel, just as much as I know many who don't go to the seaside in the summer months because of the cost to take the train, park etc. We already have many many incentives to try and get people to travel by train to some kind of local touristy thing or to drive local economy. What better incentive than to provide travel for "free"

I'll be a regular forumite for a moment here and throw out some random numbers. I think, the last time I checked, it was only around 2% of transport was rail. Chuck in the [redacted]% of travel in unpaid fares and you will chip away at what income the network actually brings in overall revenue. If you then extrapolate that moving to a tax based system you generate an income stream based on 100% of the council tax system. You now have millions more people paying for travel that they are never going to use. Personally, I barely paid a penny in train fares for about 3yrs. I've tapped in the tube but rarely use anything outside my network (which I get for free) Even if my council tax was increased by £20 a year for local train services Its money the railway would never have got from me. My neighbours are worse. They don't use public transport whatsoever. Using some back of the packet figures. My local council would raise £2.2mil in revenue if everyone paid a small, measly £20 on their council tax. I pay £121(11%) for a 'police and crime commissioner' !

Even if you didn't go totally free. You could add it to the council tax to allow free travel for under 21yr olds, Over 60's, local resident schemes (offsetting costs) What would be the savings/cost if you have a turnstile at every station where you tapped in for a quid ? Not quite 'free' but would it generate income enough to offset some of the loss ?




*and I cannot lie

 

[Thirteen]

Making public transport entirely free would make it worse rather than better especially in places like London.