Dispute with Northern RPI

[woodyalessandr]

Mr spock
i gave him my old address, about 30 seconds later ASKED FOR HIS ID, gave him my real address and then he phoned up to check, this is exactly what the second post implies if you read it carefully.

i originally did not realise he was an official because he was wearing a suit, not a NR uniform, also i honestly thought that anyone who treats a customer in that was and was that intimidating and such a bully, could only be a scam for money, it is well known around Manchester that on Trains and Trams people get a uniform and on the spot fine people, only to run off with their money as they are con men.

as for the sold me a ticket query, i got a ticket on the train, so why did the official not ask for my tab from burnage on there, if he had done i would have clicked and said *oh ***** i havent come from there today, can i have a week pass from here or an extra ticket*

However if you dont shed any tears, i really couldn’t care less!!!


caughtontrain

Thankyou for your understanding, i originally came on here for advice, but it seems like forums are for people to judge and slate you, a few kind people have answered my op and a few just want to try and cause an argument or make themselves feel better by being judgemental...i wouldnt worry about it, but thankyou for sticking up for me again.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The train did stop at burnage
but in burnage they were giving out vouchers on the platform with your ticket, i got on the stop before burnage so didnt have a voucher, when the inspector asked where i travelled from i was too honest and told him, but i actually didnt realise what i had done at the time! there is 2 mins between the stations and early mornings are hard!!!

 

[northwichcat]

The train did stop at burnage but in burnage they were giving out vouchers on the platform with your ticket, i got on the stop before burnage so didnt have a voucher, when the inspector asked where i travelled from i was too honest and told him, but i actually didnt realise what i had done at the time! there is 2 mins between the stations and early mornings are hard!!!

I've never heard of that before. It also sounds very strange as there is more chance of someone trying to claim they boarded at East Didsbury, Gatley or Heald Green to avoid paying the full fare for their journey over Burnage.

 

[Greenback]

I think the OP has explained why a false address was given, which in any case was not a false address, merely an old address. As far as I am aware the legal system does not recognise that we "have" one legally recognised address except for electoral reasons. I myself have been in situations where you get some jumped up intimidating jobsworth and your first reaction is "why should I give you any personally identifying info about me? get stuffed!". It would be different if they were polite, discreet, properly identified themselves and some air of authority about them.

Frankly, I can't believe the comments made by Ferret and earlier by First Class. They are mechanistic and unfeeling beyond belief. If it was the OP's intention to get away with it, why would she post on this website in the first place?

There's far too much smugness and perfection amongst some of the people on this site. If I get flamed for this, I don't care.

And I would like to see something said about the legality of these 'vouchers' being issued by Northern at Burnage (as Yorkie pointed out). It's a joke to treat customers in that way. It's underhand, deceitful and patronising to the 99% law abiding (if sometimes forgetful) passengers. What would have happened if a passenger was legally combining two tickets? Why should they be forced to defend this publicly under an accusatorial spotlight by some jumped up gorilla? (Forgive me, but in my extensive experience of travelling by rail that's basically what I find RPI's to be. Sorry.)

The TOCs have a very dim view of humanity. They should concentrate on staffing up properly (guards not RPIs), getting their services and rolling stock right (I don't care about the usual "it's the DfT..... this and that", if they're not big enough to invest in a few train carriages of their own volition, what's the point of a private operator on our railways).

The whole railway system nowadays basically makes me sick. It's no wonder people eschew it in favour of their cars.

While I don't agree with the posts by Ferret and First Class, I don;t think it can be said that to try and catch people who deliberately try and cheat the system, thus depriving the TOC's of revenue and meaning greater subsidy has to be paid to the likes of Northern is deceitful or underhand. When passengers deliberately lie to obtain services at a reduced rate, by stating they got on at X when nthey have really traveleld further, that is what is fraudulent, deceitful and underhand.

Having said that, I think TOC's can and should do a lot more to ensure that their representatives act in a more professional and sensitive manner before accusing people of being, in effect, criminals. They can and should do more to ensure that people can actually purchase the ticket they want in the first place, and that staff are always available.

I'm a bit confused by the original post.

If woodyalessandr was questioned at Piccadilly I'm assuming the RPI staff (who would have been G4S staff paid for by Northern not Northern staff) didn't know he/she got on at East Didsbury but knew he/she'd had alighted a service from Manchester Airport.

So is it the case that the train didn't call at Burnage? In which case a spilt ticket or excess wouldn't have been valid and a new ticket should have been purchased for the whole journey.

I am also a bit confused about these particular circumstances. I don't know the precise geogrpahy of the area, which doesn't help!

 

[northwichcat]

I don't know the precise geogrpahy of the area, which doesn't help!

Burnage is one of the stops between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport.

The stops are (in order are):
Manchester Airport
Heald Green
Gatley
East Didsbury
Burnage
Mauldeth Road
Manchester Piccadilly

Some services do Piccadilly-Airport non-stop while others do all stops and some do just East Didsbury and Heald Green.

 

[janb]

And I would like to see something said about the legality of these 'vouchers' being issued by Northern at Burnage (as Yorkie pointed out). It's a joke to treat customers in that way. It's underhand, deceitful and patronising to the 99% law abiding (if sometimes forgetful) passengers.

If you think 99% of passengers are law abiding you are being naive. If you worked in the industry saw the numbers of people attempting ticketless travel you would understand the tone of Ferret and First Class posts.

 

[woodyalessandr]

hope this helps

http://www.northernrail.org/pdfs/timetables/20100523/21.pdf

Page 11
755 train

 

[Greenback]

If you think 99% of passengers are law abiding you are being naive. If you worked in the industry saw the numbers of people attempting ticketless travel you would understand the tone of Ferret and First Class posts.

I agree, but I still believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty!

hope this helps

http://www.northernrail.org/pdfs/timetables/20100523/21.pdf

Page 11
755 train

Thank you for the link. I understand now, it's what I assumed in the first place!

I would say that you have been telling the truth. Clearly, courts and magistrates do take into account the fact that people may have just moved, or have more than one address, and so they should, as they are supposed to look at each case on its merits.

Also, the second person took into account your season ticket, the fact that you admitted travelling from East Didsbury (when you could have claimed to have got on at Mauldeth Road) and decided, rightly in my opinion, that you were not a serial fare evader.

I have heard bad things about G4S, who sub contract for Northern on revenue duties at Manchesater Piccadilly. Try not to take it personally, many of these staff are not sufficiently trained and lack basic courtesy and communication skills from what I hear. But please remember that technically you were travelling without a ticket, though I;m sure after this experience you will never forget to buy that extra ticket again!

 

[caughtonatrain]

If you think 99% of passengers are law abiding you are being naive. If you worked in the industry saw the numbers of people attempting ticketless travel you would understand the tone of Ferret and First Class posts.

We can have a debate about the numbers, but the point is that I don't work in the industry and it's how I perceive the situation to be. To me (one of the law abiding ones), the system seems over the top and tends towards the aggressive and judgmental.

Even if fare dodging is the huge problem the TOCS make it out to be, I would still not understand the tone of the Ferret and First Class posts. They are making no attempt to understand the nuances of the situation but rather see everything in terms of black & white. If they think that it's worth Northern's time prosecuting this sort of case for the sake of £1.20 then they really are misguided and rather - might I hazard - naive.

If they are in "the industry" (whatever that is these days when the likes of G4S are part of it), then may I suggest that a career in North Korean Law Enforcement might be more their style.

 

[Greenback]

From what I see every day, the vast majority of rail's customers are honest. They queue to buy a ticket in the morning at the local ticket office, even though there's no barriers, they buy on board if the queue is long without penalty, and most of the time everyone is happy and content!

What I found from working on the railway was that you don't really remember the pleasant customers, the ones that stick in your mind are the rude people, those who use other people's railcards, try and travel on invalid tickets or have no ticket at all. Inevitably, this can colour your view of people, which leads to unsavoury incidents where staff sometimes get it wrong. Unfortunately, it is easy to misjudge a situation, and very difficult to be right all the time. railway staff are only human, and they generally far, far better than G4S!

 

[Ferret]

I think the OP has explained why a false address was given, which in any case was not a false address, merely an old address. As far as I am aware the legal system does not recognise that we "have" one legally recognised address except for electoral reasons. I myself have been in situations where you get some jumped up intimidating jobsworth and your first reaction is "why should I give you any personally identifying info about me? get stuffed!". It would be different if they were polite, discreet, properly identified themselves and some air of authority about them.

Frankly, I can't believe the comments made by Ferret and earlier by First Class. They are mechanistic and unfeeling beyond belief. If it was the OP's intention to get away with it, why would she post on this website in the first place?

There's far too much smugness and perfection amongst some of the people on this site. If I get flamed for this, I don't care.

And I would like to see something said about the legality of these 'vouchers' being issued by Northern at Burnage (as Yorkie pointed out). It's a joke to treat customers in that way. It's underhand, deceitful and patronising to the 99% law abiding (if sometimes forgetful) passengers. What would have happened if a passenger was legally combining two tickets? Why should they be forced to defend this publicly under an accusatorial spotlight by some jumped up gorilla? (Forgive me, but in my extensive experience of travelling by rail that's basically what I find RPI's to be. Sorry.)

It's probably a good job you don't care about being flamed.......

Right, starting from the top of your lengthy gibber on this subject:

An old address is a false address on the grounds it is not the OP's current address. Like it or not, the byelaws do require you to provide, when asked by a railway official, to provide *correct* details, and to be correct, they have to be current.

Furthermore, the "smugness and perfection" you refer to translated into non-gibber means actually complying with your responsibilities and accepting the consequences of your own actions. Here, the OP travelled without a ticket at some point in the journey that was made. "Shorting" is clearly an issue in that area and Northern are well within their rights to try and deal with this issue. What the hell is underhand about dealing with fare evasion in this way?

To then compound matters further, the OP then gave the wrong address. I suspect that this will all be referred to in a TIR or an MG11 and as this is a clear breach of the byelaws. I expect the OP will be summoned to Court and then the result should the OP be convicted will be a fine, probably in the region of £300. Whether I/you/we view that as harsh is neither here nor there - the laws of the land are there for a reason, as are the consequences of breaking them.

Sorry Caughtonatrain, but you are on completely the wrong side of the argument here. Regardless of how "unfeeling" I am being, the fact is that the OP failed to travel with a ticket and then gave incorrect details. Being unaware of the Law or just forgetting is not a defence in Law I'm afraid.

Now a question for the OP, let's assume you weren't stopped at the barrier at Man Picc but as you walked down towards the exit you suddenly remembered that you had made a mistake and you had travelled for part of your journey without a ticket. Can you honestly say you would have stopped and nipped into the ticket office and paid the outstanding fare?

My advice to the OP is to seek some proper legal advice to see if anything can be done.

 

[caughtonatrain]

Greenback, I am glad that there is a measured view on this. Your view accords with my own as a 'user'/'customer'/'passenger' (whichever you prefer) of the railways. The vast majority of folk are decent. The vast majority of staff are excellent. The difficult cases (on both sides) stick out.

I just think it's a shame we have come to the situation where some peoples' jobs and specialisms are essentially to catch people out, which only breeds resentment. But then, RPIs with minimal training are cheaper to hire than qualified guards with prospects in the 'industry'. And I think that's a shame, because it means that the public service ethos is being eroded from the railway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ferret, we'll never agree on this. Suffice it to say, you have confirmed my worst suspicions. You really can't help yourself.

 

[Greenback]

Agreed. The erosion of the public service isn't just confiend to the railway. In my working life I have also been a postal worker and a civil servant. In both of these jobs I would in times past have been regarded as a public servant, but this is far from the case these days. Sadly, once you are not seen as a public servant, you tend not t behave like one either!

 

[flymo]

Just out of curiosity how do they check the validity of the address? The Electoral Role? Council tax records or what else? If it is done quickly as it seems to be by phone there has to be some sort of central database.

 

[Ferret]

Ferret, we'll never agree on this. Suffice it to say, you have confirmed my worst suspicions. You really can't help yourself.

I really can't help myself to do what? Be realistic? So terribly sorry if that offends. The reality is that all the blarting on here about how unfair it all is will not help the OP or anyone else. The OP has been caught and may well face the consequences. Getting proper legal advice to make sure there were no procedural irregularities is the OP's only hope. The likelihood is that the OP will be issued with a summons to Court in due course - the fact of the matter is many TOCs are now looking to deal with fare evasion in the Courts, mainly to send out a strong message that fare evasion will not be tolerated.

 

[Greenback]

Ferret, I don't really want to get caught up in a war of flames here, but Yorkie has posted a link where a court did throw out a Northern Rail prosecution where a similar small sum was involved and an incorrect address was given as well.

Courts do, rightly, take all factors into account, and it is impossible to predict with any accuracy the outcome of a case, but there is a clear precedent in the report, if the facts are accurate.

In these circumstances, I doubt very much whether it's in the interests of Northern, the industry as a whole, society or (obviuolsy!) the OP to prosecute.

 

[caughtonatrain]

Just out of curiosity how do they check the validity of the address? The Electoral Role? Council tax records or what else? If it is done quickly as it seems to be by phone there has to be some sort of central database.

Yes, there is a sort of central database. The scary thing (and this was the main point that was lost in the debate about ID cards) is that this database is maintained by private sector companies who buy the Electoral Roll and use it for assessing creditworthiness. They also compile information about us and our addresses from supermarket loyalty cards, bank accounts, white goods guarantees and various other sources. This is used to geodemographically profile us for the purposes of marketing and also for, as I said, assessing credit risk. But, notwithstanding your personal views on that, it is also increasingly used to track peoples' addresses. Incidentally, legally speaking we don't own our addresses (the Royal Mail does) and, as far as I can tell, the law does not recognise a main or sole address. It is for that reason that the courts will refer to people as of no fixed abode - we are not legally obliged to possess an address! So I suspect that G4S/Northern check with their database provider of choice.

This may be: Equifax, Experian, CACI, Axciom or one of a number of other providers of this type of information.

Note, too, that the Electoral Roll is an incomplete list of people - it's only people entitled to vote and who declare themselves as such!

 

[woodyalessandr]

Honestly
If there were no barriers i would have just gone through because as stupid as it sounds it was an innocent mistake and i wouldn't have noticed.
i have been getting on at Burnage for weeks and was this week too, i got on in dids in a fluster in the morning as i had popped home to grab some stuff in the morning, got my burnage week ticket on the train and literally forgot that i had got on at mine that morning. it may not seem plausible to some of you, but if you realised how dopey i am anyway you would believe me.
me.

 

[Railjet]

I do find something odd though. The OP showed a pass that was clearly valid from at the location where the ticket was being checked and valid for disembarking from the train in question. There is no way for barrier staff at Piccadilly to know that there is anything amiss there. This idea of 'extra' tickets is surely nonsense? Do Northern really issue extra tickets in this way? If so, what is the legality of that?

The legality is non-existent, I'm sure.

Where does it say that these extra tickets form part of the contract between passenger and TOC? Nowhere. Whilst I would be the first person to complain about fare-dodging, this is a cheap and slipshod attempt by a TOC to protect its revenue by putting the onus on the customer.

I hope someone making a genuine journey gets one of these tickets, throws it away, then when questioned by an RPI say exactly that. You have a valid ticket for your journey, they have no right to ask you for any personal details, and if they attempt to stop you, would lay themselves open to prosecution for obstruction or, in the worst case, false imprisonment.

 

[flymo]

Thanks for that info, and sorry for saying Role not Roll, D'oh!.

No database can ever be 100% correct so what would happen if a person was stopped, gave their correct address but this was not found on 'the database'. i.e. they had recently moved house or area, or even country and had not yet had a chance to update themselves on the list?

Sorry but to me, private companies should never have access to such information without a court order. No wonder identity theft is such a problem.

 

[Greenback]

Thanks for that info, and sorry for saying Role not Roll, D'oh!.

No database can never be 100% correct so what would happen if a person was stopped, gave their correct address but this was not found on 'the database'. i.e. they had recently moved house or area, or even country and had not yet had a chance to update themselves on the list?

Sorry but to me, private companies should never have access to such information without a court order. No wonder identity theft is such a problem.

Exactly. Despite what some may say or think, the fact that a railway byelaw has been broken does not automatically mean that the person in question should or will be prosecuted, or that the prosecution is guaranteed to succeed. The law simply does not wokr like that in this country, depsite the introduction of fixed penalties which encourage people to admit an offence and get things over with just so they can avoid the hassle of having to defend themselves.

In cases like this one, courts may well give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has mistakenly provioded an old address, particularly when a change of address has taken place relatively recently.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

The next time Ferret looks down at the speedo of their car (if they are a driver) and find they are exceeding the speed limit, I am sure they will drive themselves to the nearest police station and hand themselves in.

 

[Ferret]

Courts do, rightly, take all factors into account, and it is impossible to predict with any accuracy the outcome of a case, but there is a clear precedent in the report, if the facts are accurate.

Agreed, and that's exactly why I suggested the OP seek proper legal advice. The fact still remains that the OP was in breach of a byelaw when giving a false address and when travelling without a ticket for part of the journey made. I think the only way the OP can escape a prosecution is on a technicality - ie, if the RPI did not follow correct procedures.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The next time Ferret looks down at the speedo of their car (if they are a driver) and find they are exceeding the speed limit, I am sure they will drive themselves to the nearest police station and hand themselves in.

A complete irrelevance to the matter at hand. Going to the ticket office to pay your fare is not 'grassing yourself up'...

 

[Greenback]

Agreed, and that's exactly why I suggested the OP seek proper legal advice. The fact still remains that the OP was in breach of a byelaw when giving a false address and when travelling without a ticket for part of the journey made. I think the only way the OP can escape a prosecution is on a technicality - ie, if the RPI did not follow correct procedures.

Do you think that a prosecution will be a right and proper use of both Northern's resources, and the court's time? How much will it cost Northern and HM Court Service (and therefore us as taxpayers) to bring this to trial? What evidence would Northern be able to supply to back up their prosecution?

When someone gets on a train before someone else has got off, whether intentionally or not, they are breaking the byelaws! Should they also be prosecuted?

 

[Ferret]

Despite what some may say or think, the fact that a railway byelaw has been broken does not automatically mean that the person in question should or will be prosecuted, or that the prosecution is guaranteed to succeed. The law simply does not wokr like that in this country, depsite the introduction of fixed penalties which encourage people to admit an offence and get things over with just so they can avoid the hassle of having to defend themselves.

In cases like this one, courts may well give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has mistakenly provioded an old address, particularly when a change of address has taken place relatively recently.

Greenback, you need to take into account the fact that at the present time, TOCs are looking to use the byelaws to deal with fare evasion. This seems to be a relatively recent development in that the TOCs seem to be hiring a Prosecutor on a 'no win no fee' basis to deal with offences relating to fare evasion under the byelaws. And it's this current climate that has relevance - Yorkie is able to quote one example where Northern have lost. Guess how many examples Northern could quote from the opposite side of the coin! The Courts are finding in favour of the TOCs in a huge majority of cases so I have to say that the Law in this country *is* working like that (as you put it!).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Do you think that a prosecution will be a right and proper use of both Northern's resources, and the court's time? How much will it cost Northern and HM Court Service (and therefore us as taxpayers) to bring this to trial? What evidence would Northern be able to supply to back up their prosecution?

When someone gets on a train before someone else has got off, whether intentionally or not, they are breaking the byelaws! Should they also be prosecuted?

I posted my last before you sent this, so although I'm probably repeating myself here - I believe it is done on a 'no win no fee' basis. Court Costs are paid for by the defendants if found guilty! The reality is that Northern aren't wasting resources and neither is taxpayer's money being wasted.

As for your second point about getting on and off the train, it's probably best if you don't get me started on that! I know it's a byelaw breach but it's also basic common courtesy.... Should it be a prosecutable offence? Probably not - it shouldn't need to be.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

Agreed, and that's exactly why I suggested the OP seek proper legal advice. The fact still remains that the OP was in breach of a byelaw when giving a false address and when travelling without a ticket for part of the journey made. I think the only way the OP can escape a prosecution is on a technicality - ie, if the RPI did not follow correct procedures.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


A complete irrelevance to the matter at hand. Going to the ticket office to pay your fare is not 'grassing yourself up'...

You asked the OP if she would have gone back to the ticket office if she had already left the station. No of course she wouldn't, just as you wouldn't "grass yourself up".

Only a "complete irrelevance" on planet perfect.

 

[Greenback]

Greenback, you need to take into account the fact that at the present time, TOCs are looking to use the byelaws to deal with fare evasion. This seems to be a relatively recent development in that the TOCs seem to be hiring a Prosecutor on a 'no win no fee' basis to deal with offences relating to fare evasion under the byelaws. And it's this current climate that has relevance - Yorkie is able to quote one example where Northern have lost. Guess how many examples Northern could quote from the opposite side of the coin! The Courts are finding in favour of the TOCs in a huge majority of cases so I have to say that the Law in this country *is* working like that (as you put it!).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I posted my last before you sent this, so although I'm probably repeating myself here - I believe it is done on a 'no win no fee' basis. Court Costs are paid for by the defendants if found guilty! The reality is that Northern aren't wasting resources and neither is taxpayer's money being wasted.

As for your second point about getting on and off the train, it's probably best if you don't get me started on that! I know it's a byelaw breach but it's also basic common courtesy.... Should it be a prosecutable offence? Probably not - it shouldn't need to be.

Yeah, not letting people off irritates the hell out of me too! I brought it up because you were saying that the OP had broken the byelaws by giving a false address, as if to say that it was the fact that the byelaws were broken was more important and that's why they should be prosecuted! In fact, from the story given, an old address was given, which isn;t the same as maybe making an address up. I would look on that as far more serious than soemthing that could be, as said here, a simple mistake.

What I am trying tos ay about any prosecution is that there must be some sort of administration cost to Northern involved, as well as the costs to us as taxpayers in actually hearing the case. Even if found guilty, costs awarded rarely reflect the true figure of how much it costs HMCS in terms of administrative staff, court staff, building costs and everything else. And of course, if the defendant wins, and I would not be surprised if a case like this was dismissed, then no costs are recovered at all, unless they are taken from Northern for wasting the courts time!

Finally, the case Yorkie highlighted did have a lot of similarities to this one, except that the defendant even lied about where she got on, and admitted doing so! Do you, personally, think that a prosecution is worth it? Given that there is a possibility that the case will be dismissed as per precedent, that there would probably be adverse publicity for Northern as a result, and that this may encourage fare evasion as people will then think they will be able to get away with it in court, I would say no, prosecution is not justified in this case! The risks are high and the rewards are low!

 

[Ferret]

Yeah, not letting people off irritates the hell out of me too! I brought it up because you were saying that the OP had broken the byelaws by giving a false address, as if to say that it was the fact that the byelaws were broken was more important and that's why they should be prosecuted! In fact, from the story given, an old address was given, which isn;t the same as maybe making an address up. I would look on that as far more serious than soemthing that could be, as said here, a simple mistake.

What I am trying tos ay about any prosecution is that there must be some sort of administration cost to Northern involved, as well as the costs to us as taxpayers in actually hearing the case. Even if found guilty, costs awarded rarely reflect the true figure of how much it costs HMCS in terms of administrative staff, court staff, building costs and everything else. And of course, if the defendant wins, and I would not be surprised if a case like this was dismissed, then no costs are recovered at all, unless they are taken from Northern for wasting the courts time!

Finally, the case Yorkie highlighted did have a lot of similarities to this one, except that the defendant even lied about where she got on, and admitted doing so! Do you, personally, think that a prosecution is worth it? Given that there is a possibility that the case will be dismissed as per precedent, that there would probably be adverse publicity for Northern as a result, and that this may encourage fare evasion as people will then think they will be able to get away with it in court, I would say no, prosecution is not justified in this case! The risks are high and the rewards are low!

Because the cases are 'no win no fee', the Prosecutor will only take them on if he feels he has an excellent chance of winning them. Of course there is an admin cost to Northern in terms of report writing but then that's exactly what the RPIs are paid for! It matters not what I personally think, the TOCs are looking to prosecute cases of fare evasion at the moment as that is perceived as a threat to their business. Can you blame them?! And the thing with providing incorrect details is that it gives the impression of trying to avoid the fare which is why the Courts have in general been convicting people. And yes, I am speaking from experience here.....

 

[Greenback]

Well, it;s not worth arguing about! We'll have to wait and see whether they decide to go to court! I just think Northern could end up with egg on their faces, and that would do no one any favours!

I understand if you are reluctant to post your opinion because you might get into trouble (I don't know what you do or where you work), I probably wouldn't if I was still a TOC employee.

 

[Ferret]

You asked the OP if she would have gone back to the ticket office if she had already left the station. No of course she wouldn't, just as you wouldn't "grass yourself up".

Only a "complete irrelevance" on planet perfect.

Hmmm, quite wrong there I'm afraid! The ticket office at Man Picc is an opportunity to buy a ticket. You'll find some of the prosecutions that the TOCs have been successful with is based on the question of what somebody says when asked 'would you have bought a ticket before leaving railway premises if I hadn't stopped you today?'

Greenback, you're right; we will have to see - it's all probably going to be down to Northern's prosecutor. If he feels he can win the case he will go ahead. If he doesn't, Northern will probably take the TIR forward as a civil debt and be in touch with the OP about payment.

 

[laseandre]

On behalf of Chaz, who still browses the forum, and informed me about this thread through another method.

A few of you know I work for a TOC in a similar Revenue Protection manner and I'm quite familiar with the way the system works. There are a few on RailUK forum who are posting a variety of different things about Penalty Fares. Northern do not operate a Penalty Fares system so none of the rules here applies. Here is some facts...

The Manchester Airport - Piccadilly line is a local stopping service run by Northern and occasional TPE stopping trains. The stops are frequently 2/3 minutes apart and the Conductor cannot issue tickets to every customer travelling. The Airport Line has booking offices open in the morning at each station (apart from staffing shortage/sickness) so technically all passengers should have the correct ticket/pass thus leaving the Conductor to concentrate on safety critical duties relating to timekeeping and the working of the train. Now this is not the case as people run late or people cannot be bothered to queue up for a ticket, some will even chance it and won't pay. Piccadilly is an "open station" e.g. with no automatic ticket barriers but does have human ticket RPIs in place. This is usually done by a company called G4S who has a contract from Northern. Most trains from the Airport Line have the G4S team in place to sell tickets and ensure everyone has a correct ticket before leaving the platforms and onto the main station. Occasionally the G4S team cannot block the platform off due to staff shortage or other reasons. This simply allows people with no ticket to leave the station and thus get free travel. Simply put, this is fare evasion as there is a ticket office available at the station boarded at. See Conditions of Carriage for details.

Now, there are barriers in place at Piccadilly and you have no ticket. For example, you boarded at Heald Green and have walked past the booking office, probably ignored the Conductor and have no ticket. The RPI at the barrier sells you a ticket and asks from where. Instead of saying "Heald Green" you say "Mauldeth Road" which is the last stop before Piccadilly and you save yourself money and are a thief. Now, your not the only one doing this there are probably nearly hundreds of people doing this everyday on the Airport line. Simply put this is fare evasion and is called a "Short Fare".

To combat this problem. TOCs frequently block off stations stations near the terminus/large station such as Mauldeth Road and Burnage. This means no one can enter or leave the ticket without a valid ticket or voucher. When passengers are a Piccadilly and need to buy a ticket and say they boarded at a blocked station then they have details taken, checked and passed onto the Prosecutions Team. There is a good success rate in prosecutions as the system works and the courts recognise this system.

For the last 3 weeks I have been staying with a friend in Burnage- therefore I have been buying Burnage tickets.
However yestedray morning I popped home for something and got on the train at East Didsbury, I got my pass as usual and genuinely made the mistake of not getting an extra ticket from Didsbury to Burnage, It was early in the morning and I had been in a rush not to be late for work, I have been used to getting the Burnage ticket for the last few weeks and in my haste and stupidity just simply didn’t think about it as I had bought a week pass.(its a 2 minute journey-around 90p)
When I got off at Piccadilly I was stopped and questioned for not having an extra ticket

There is a ticket office at East Didsbury you should of really bought the weekly ticket from there. Even if you didn't pay the 90p (ish) excess from East Didsbury to Burnage your weekly ticket would of got you through the barriers at Piccadilly.

I was treated like a criminal and publically humiliated over the situation in the middle of the station. In my sheer panic and actual anxiety of the situation, I gave the inspector my old address I did not intend to do this but I felt intimidated, threatened, bullied- and I was thinking that with the way he was being he could not possibly be a genuine inspector and I was being scammed (Also I did not want a stranger knowing where I live) . When I asked that he show me his ID, I then corrected myself and told him my real address and apologised for giving him the wrong details and explained why

From past experience of witnessing these blocks, people who have fare evaded are taken to one side usually a bench and have the conversation there. If there was an issue of humiliated then write a complaint (personally I would do the same). A member of railway staff such as Revenue Protection Officers/Inspectors or Conductor have the legal right to ask for details as stated in the Conditions of Carriage (all passengers legally abide by this when stepping foot on a train). I severally doubt it would be a scam artist as it's a busy station with hundreds of staff floating through. Something would of been picked up immediately. Giving a false address is illegal and will probably create a solid case to prosecute you. Human error, such as myself popping a can of drink into my work bag before paying for it with my bag of crisps, I would be prosecuted for theft if caught.

He then repeatedly told me that i was in serious trouble and i was to follow him, when i did he asked another inspector what he needs to do with a week ticket, this inspector said NOTHING give it her back, told me that in the future i have to get the surplus but as i have a week ticket i am obviously not fare dodging. As i said thankyou and started to leave the original inspector told me *you will be hearing from us- you are in serious trouble- hold on to your ticket for my evidence* i asked what would happen to me and he wouldnt tell me. Nothing was signed and no ticket was taken, i am now worried sick because i cant get a criminal record and frankly i have no money either to pay huge fines...i dont know how long it takes to come through the post and i am also worried (by reading other threads) i will get court dates through when im on holiday beginning of aug and not know about them

Details are taken then past onto the a Prosecutions Department. You don't sign anything or get a copy, it's an internal document. You do naturally have to right to take the Inspectors name/badge details for your own reference. It's entirely upto the professions at the Prosecutions Department to decide what course of action to take.

I'd like to point out thought that a series of errors on the OP behalf have made it a tricky situation.

- Not Renewing a weekly ticket when a ticket office was available
- Not stating the origin station (East Didsbury) an 'unblocked' station. Although you did require a Burnage - Picc ticket you should of mentioned East Didsbury as a boarding point
- False details given

Now I know a few of people in Revenue. Now I'm certainly not calling the original poster a liar infact we could be best friends but people do tell one sided stories and a few people go running to the internet or people in the know to try and find a loophole to get out of the situation, not just fare evasion but Penalty Fares, Parking fines, Crime etc... The lady in this article was actually verbally abusive towards the RPI and was proven that she never actually boarded at Trafford Park (She didn't even know the basic layout of the station, a subway entrance) but went running to the MEN bleeding her heart out for poverty. http://menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... _40p_error