CrossCountry Prosecution article (Guardian)

[455driver]

I think the second opportunity 455driver was referring to was at Exeter St Davids on the return journey, reading his other posts.

It is!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ah forgive me, my understanding, based on 455's post, was that Newton Abbott was the destination and not the origin.

Why dont you read the relevant post then!
Everyone else seems to understand the journey being made! :roll:

Belligerent enough for you?

 

[Geronimo]

But as haywain has stated most are not simple mistakes are they? If we actually got tougher on fare evasion then even the most hardcore of them would think twice.

That is not obvious at all.

 

[Tibbs]

It is!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Why dont you read the relevant post then!
Everyone else seems to understand the journey being made! :roll:

Belligerent enough for you?

Thank you for clarifying.

 

[Tetchytyke]

If we actually got tougher on fare evasion then even the most hardcore of them would think twice.

The criminal justice system proves the opposite.

 

[MikeWh]

But as haywain has stated most are not simple mistakes are they? If we actually got tougher on fare evasion then even the most hardcore of them would think twice.

Maybe, maybe not. However, if I thought that failing to touch in properly at a validator (rather than a gate) could land me in court with no questions asked, I can assure you that I'd never set foot on a train again.

 

[jp4712]

Hmm, let me give you a real-life example. Last year I arrived at Tower Hill DLR and before boarding the train I decided to top up my PAYG Oyster from my credit card. That done, I walked past the Oyster reader (no gates at Tower Hill) and got on the train on autopilot because, I think, my subconscious had said "you've done the Oyster malarkey, get on".

At that point, as we waited to depart, an RPI (or equivalent on DLR) got on and scanned my Oyster and of course it hadn't been touched in (but I assume it flagged that the card had just been topped up). The RPI realised I'd made a mistake and invited me to go back and touch in, which I did, and got back on the same train in plenty of time to depart.

Should I have been issued with a PFN? If I had, I'd have sworn never to use the DLR again (this was a company journey and I could've taken a taxi) but instead the RPI showed discretion and made a friend (and repeat customer). So, although I have zero sympathy for deliberate cases (and I include all the usual 'I thought it would be okay just the once' stories) but taking away ALL discretion would undoubtedly counterproductive.

 

[Greenback]

There are probably scores of such incidents where discretion is shown every day on the rail network. The vast majority of these never get reported, whereas the cases where someone is caught and asked for their version of events is far more likely to result in those instances coming into the public domain.

There does need to be a deterrent to fare evasion, and what is a deterrent to person A will be less of a deterrent, or perhaps not a deterrent at all to person B. From the posts on here asking for help and assistance it would seem that the biggest deterrent overall is the possibility of a criminal record, so perhaps there is some merit in Clip's suggestion.

At least if someone was told that they were likely to be prosecuted but they managed to settle out of court for an admin fee of £80, that would be more of a deterrent than 3 or 4 penalty fares. That seems to be thinking of some TOC's, anyway!