FCC vs Twitter

[drbdrb]

https://mobile.twitter.com/FirstCC/status/500657582957404160

completely humiliated after using the line for the first time and asking to buy a ticket on board. Never been treated so badly

Did you not have a ticket before you boarded the train, and was therefore asked to purchase a ticket once onboard the service?

I wasn't able to buy a ticket at my start point and immediately asked to buy a ticket for the full journey on board but was instead

actively tried to buy a ticket but was denied by your staff intent on causing humiliation and calling police #powertrip

I'm very sorry that you were treated this way. When you asked onboard staff if you could puchase a ticket, what did they say?

they immediately said it was not possible with no discussion and said I had to pay a fine and give details to be reported

https://mobile.twitter.com/FirstCC/status/499965160401162241

08:18 LBG to BTN: ticket inspectors acted hostile, unhelpful, condescending, and threatening to 2 tourists, are those your values?

It started when two tourists on their way to Gatwick to leave the country thought they could travel farther than East Croydon with their Oyster cards. The gentlemen did not have the cash on hand nor a card the ticket inspectors' machines would accept. What followed was an uncomfortable lengthy exchange, mostly conducted in the tone of a teacher to a primary school pupil (with disregard for the adult age of the passengers), in which the ticket inspectors made no attempt to suggest ways of solving the problem and any attempt by the tourists to accept blame and behave in a civilised and friendly manner met deaf ears, downturned mouths, and a disgusting and angry demeanor from your staff. It became obvious that the exchange would not lead to anywhere when any attempt to resolve the situation was met with the repeated claim that the responsibility of knowing how far oyster cards are valid lay with the passengers and nothing the passengers could say 'mattered' (nor did finding a solution matter either apparently). However true it may be that the passengers were responsible, the means by which this fact was delivered resembled no customer 'service' I've ever seen before. The lack of help the two ticket inspectors were willing to give reached its peak when, a fellow passenger, out of the kindness of his heart, volunteered to provide the £40 needed for the fine these gentlemen could not pay and the ticket inspectors refused to allow it on the basis that the money had to come from the passengers themselves. The hostility itself eventually culminated in the aggressively delivered threat of having the men arrested. However justified such action may be its tone and delivery was not that of a warning but a direct threat. - I can't tell you the name of the inspectors, but surely there is some timesheet listing who was supposed to be working on that train.

 

[Merseysider]

The first thread: the woman should really have bought a ticket before boarding, and the second thread: it sounds like two Penalty Fares were issued, correctly. However a little humanity goes a long way... sadly this is about the tenth time I've read about FCC treating passengers badly.

 

[Searle]

Unfortunately it's not hard for me to believe these stories, I've only ever received poor customer service from FCC as well (although fortunately I've never been in a situation like that, I've seen others).

 

[richw]

If the police were called on the first one I'm pretty sure more than she is saying happened

 

[drbdrb]

If the police were called on the first one I'm pretty sure more than she is saying happened

Why? What else is the RPI going to do?

- Can I buy a ticket
- No, here is a £20 penalty fare, can I take your details
- Why can't I buy a ticket?
- Because you should have bought one before you got on the train, so £20 and your details please
- But I can do that in Manchester
- This isn't Manchester, £20 and your details please.
- That's not fair
- £20 and your details please
- No

So what next, apart from the police?

 

[Class377]

To me, it just looks like 2 people complaining that they'd been caught (or, in the second instance, that other people had been caught). If they'd have held a valid ticket, they wouldn't have been asked to pay up.

I'm sure the company isn't too worried about image now they have less than a month left, so they might as well pursue as much revenue as possible I imagine.

 

[SS4]

The problem with this is that we only get given the complainant's side of the story and anyone acting in an official FCC capacity must toe the company line which doesn't allow them to air their version of events. This is a problem across the whole of customer service where customers cannot be questioned.

Mind you I am not saying that she is outright lying but even subconsciously things get embellished, details forgotten and so on. Anger suppresses rational thought (ever thought why the news induces anger) and with social media you no longer have to wait until you get home to air your views.

Both outcomes are plausible but it'd be nice to see a company defend themselves for once

edit: Usually I find this is because companies are petrified of negative reviews or bad feedback whether justified or otherwise. Since FCC are almost done surely they can bite back

 

[richw]

Why? What else is the RPI going to do?

- Can I buy a ticket
- No, here is a £20 penalty fare, can I take your details
- Why can't I buy a ticket?
- Because you should have bought one before you got on the train, so £20 and your details please
- But I can do that in Manchester
- This isn't Manchester, £20 and your details please.
- That's not fair
- £20 and your details please
- No

So what next, apart from the police?

The police wont be called in the situation you describe. The police are usually only called when a passenger becomes disruptive, abusive or violent.

 

[455driver]

The police wont be called in the situation you describe. The police are usually only called when a passenger becomes disruptive, abusive or violent.

Surely you are not saying that the passenger was in the wrong and is not telling us the whole truth?
On this forum?
Oh the 'passenger is always right' mob will be around with their pitchforks looking for you!

 

[NSEFAN]

Given FCC operate penalty fares, the passenger is most definitely in the wrong for not buying before they board, even if they honestly believed that they could buy on the train. A confrontational approach from either an RPI or passenger will however only make the problem worse.

 

[yorkie]

Given FCC operate penalty fares, the passenger is most definitely in the wrong for not buying before they board, even if they honestly believed that they could buy on the train.

OK, what are the details of the case then?

The passenger claimed "I wasn't able to buy a ticket at my start point", now if you're saying that's not true, I'd be interested to hear more.

If the passenger was genuinely unable to buy a ticket (e.g. the ticket office was closed and they wanted to pay by RTVs or the ticket machine wasn't accepting cash, or the ticket machine was not working, etc etc...) then they are entitled to board without a ticket.

A confrontational approach from either an RPI or passenger will however only make the problem worse.

Indeed, sadly FCC have some who are very confrontational indeed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

(or, in the second instance, that other people had been caught). If they'd have held a valid ticket, they wouldn't have been asked to pay up.

But are FCC complying with the Penalty Fare Rules? If the tourists were foreign (it's not immediately clear to me), then arguably not:-

We expect authorised collectors to use discretion towards:
• passengers who are not aware of the scheme because they are blind or partially sighted, are foreign visitor who lives abroad, do not speak English very well, or have learning difficulties;

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

edit: Usually I find this is because companies are petrified of negative reviews or bad feedback whether justified or otherwise. Since FCC are almost done surely they can bite back

FCC have been 'bighting back' for years. They don't care about their image because they know the vast majority of their passengers have no alternative viable option.

There have been several 'whistleblowers' within FCC who have reported a lot of malpractice, and a lot of witnesses of malpractice. Yet there is very little evidence of the Company taking effective action to prevent malpractice re-occuring. So it does, time and time again.

 

[MikeWh]

The lack of help the two ticket inspectors were willing to give reached its peak when, a fellow passenger, out of the kindness of his heart, volunteered to provide the £40 needed for the fine these gentlemen could not pay and the ticket inspectors refused to allow it on the basis that the money had to come from the passengers themselves.

This is the bit that interests me. Is this true (that the money has to come from the passenger)? Would it have been acceptable to give the money to the passenger first? Now I know we haven't got the full story, but I find it hard to believe that an innocent third party would make something like that up.

 

[yorkie]

I've heard of this sort of thing happening before, though it is quite rare.

Even if they could not take money from a third party, the third party could simply hand the customer the cash, as surely once the customer has the cash it's of no concern to the RPI where the cash originated from?

It's usually FCC who are involved in this sort of thing, they're responsible for more controversy than probably every other TOC combined!

 

[NSEFAN]

The passenger claimed "I wasn't able to buy a ticket at my start point", now if you're saying that's not true, I'd be interested to hear more.

If the passenger was genuinely unable to buy a ticket (e.g. the ticket office was closed and they wanted to pay by RTVs or the ticket machine wasn't accepting cash, or the ticket machine was not working, etc etc...) then they are entitled to board without a ticket.

These are valid points. I was simplifying to make a point, which was it's possible to be civil about penalty fares without tempers boiling over. Fortunately I've not used FCC enough to ever witness problems with RPIs, but they do indeed have a reputation for being harsh!

 

[bb21]

I don't read such threads on twitter as it is impossible to tell whether it is full of half-truths and, well, let's call it "touch-ups".

I must say however I find it quite odd that money offered by another person for a Penalty Fare is not accepted. If true, I do find it unacceptable.

 

[Robson689]

I must say however I find it quite odd that money offered by another person for a Penalty Fare is not accepted. If true, I do find it unacceptable.

I also find it odd. Especially because the people receiving the PF were on the train to the airport and leaving the country... What is the chance that they will ever get the money from that PF?

 

[island]

I don't imagine FCC cares much about publicity, given that it'll be defunct in under a month.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

I don't imagine FCC cares much about publicity, given that it'll be defunct in under a month.

I have no experience whatever of FCC - my only impressions come from what I have read on these forums - but noted with amusement (amazement?) their statement to ITN on the day of the Govia franchise announcement:

...We shall continue to operate First Capital Connect until the new franchise begins on 14 September 2014, and during that time we look forward to continuing improvements to our trains, stations and customer service training.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I don't read such threads on twitter as it is impossible to tell whether it is full of half-truths and, well, let's call it "touch-ups".

I must say however I find it quite odd that money offered by another person for a Penalty Fare is not accepted. If true, I do find it unacceptable.

As did the RPI !

 

[bb21]

As did the RPI !

Why did he refuse to accept it then?

 

[najaB]

Why did he refuse to accept it then?

Because... it was unacceptable. *rimshot*

 

[bb21]

Ah, my SOH went jogging by itself just then.

 

[jon0844]

I've been on a train to Gatwick and seen first hand what a FCC RPI did to a lady (tourist) that was travelling between East Croydon and Gatwick on Oyster PAYG.

She was told it wasn't valid and that she'd be sold a single from East Croydon to Gatwick, which she paid. No PF, no MG11, and no BTP.

No mention of the likely maximum cash fare that she'd also have to pay either, but she was happy.

I therefore doubt it's company policy to sting people to the airports, but some RPIs might still try it on (after all, they can) or else the passengers that get hit fail the attitude test? Of course we won't know from just one side of the story...

 

[yorkie]

I therefore doubt it's company policy to sting people to the airports, but some RPIs might still try it on (after all, they can) or else the passengers that get hit fail the attitude test? Of course we won't know from just one side of the story...

It's not allowed to be official policy to sting foreign tourists under the Penalty Fare rules.

I wouldn't say it's "just one side of the story"; it appears to be an independent witness. And there are so many of these reports of malpractice by FCC RPIs, many from reputable people, such as yourself.

It's a fact there is malpractice going on, it has been going on for years, and I'm yet to be convinced it will stop under the new franchise. It will only stop if people at the very top (most of the managers just TUPE over) make sure it stops. I will believe it when I see it.

 

[Hadders]

The issue here is the behaviour and conduct of the FCC RPI's. The passengers may well be in the wrong and a penalty fare the correct course of action but the behaviour of the RPI's appears to be unacceptable.

I know they have a difficult job to do but many of them appear to lack the necessary skills and diplomacy to deal with a difficult situation in a non-confrontational way. Ultimately this is the fault of senior management who have recruited people without the necessary behaviours to do the job, failed to train them properly and then failed to monitor and deal with shortcomings in their performance.

I'd love to see an undercover TV programme on these people.

 

[jon0844]

Having seen the RPIs high fiving each other about how many PFs they'd issued always suggested to me that even without commission or bonuses, they must have either had some financial incentive OR were simply competing amongst themselves. I always wondered if FCC had some sort of chart/league table showing those who had given the most PFs?

So even if official policy is to use discretion, as FCC has said so many times to me and others, the actual reality is that some staff are very keen to use very little discretion and 'go for the kill'.

At the other end of the spectrum are members of staff who are very kind and trusting, and people must laugh at them as they walk all over them.

There should be more consistency, but that's not going to happen when it's always going to be easier to issue a PF to a tourist that was genuinely confused, than deal with a group of rowdy people who sat in first with a standard class ticket (at best) but the RPI is on their own.

When I hear about how little support staff on the ground will get from management, and the reputation of BTP in responding to things, it's hardly surprising that we see things all over the place.

 

[Hadders]

And to think we had a thread on here last week about FCC going soft!

 

[jon0844]

And to think we had a thread on here last week about FCC going soft!

Haha, yes true.

I still think there's no strong leadership or company policy and RPIs are generally free to do what they like. Management could argue that this is down to the discretion each member of staff is allowed, but I'm not so sure.

So if you don't have a ticket (whether you genuinely could have got one or not) or have the wrong ticket etc, it's not a gamble as to whether you'll get caught but more a gamble of who you'll encounter when you get caught.

 

[Stigy]

The police wont be called in the situation you describe. The police are usually only called when a passenger becomes disruptive, abusive or violent.

Police often are called in these situations, and quite rightly. Usually. Sometimes I think staff could handle situations better and manage to almost sweet talk details out of somebody, but if they won't supply their name and address no matter how hard the staff member tries, there's surely no alternative? It's an offence to refuse details so staff are within their rights to request police assistance.

 

[Class377]

It's not allowed to be official policy to sting foreign tourists under the Penalty Fare rules.

I wouldn't say it's "just one side of the story"; it appears to be an independent witness. And there are so many of these reports of malpractice by FCC RPIs, many from reputable people, such as yourself.

It's a fact there is malpractice going on, it has been going on for years, and I'm yet to be convinced it will stop under the new franchise. It will only stop if people at the very top (most of the managers just TUPE over) make sure it stops. I will believe it when I see it.

Of course, everyone can avoid being victims of malpractice and "bullying" from RPIs by simply buying a correct ticket at their origin.