FGW at Paddington still getting evening Off Peak validity spectacularly wrong.

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, and some get increasingly angry and unpredictable if you press them to 'just look anyway'.

No customer service staff should ever "get angry" when faced by any polite request, even if the answer to it is a firm but polite (and correct) "no". If they do I'd question why they are in a customer-facing role.

Abuse is a different issue, but there is no suggestion at all of any having happened here.

 

[jon0844]

I've had staff round on me a few times. In every single case I have been right, but that doesn't really matter at the time.

In none of these cases would I say it was anything like being abused, but it's not a nice situation to be in - especially when the outcome is not getting the train you wanted to take, or not being sold the ticket you wanted.

You can also find yourself doubting yourself too, or being with people who themselves begin to doubt you and think that perhaps you're trying to be 'too clever'.

 

[MichaelAMW]

I completely agree with what you say.

I'll admit that I've experienced one or two embarrassing episodes where I've been sure I was right and I've looked something up in order to prove it to someone else, only to find out I've got it wrong.

That's not a reason to be embarrassed; that's a reason to be proud! Maybe you were trying to prove your point but at least you had the humility to check.

 

[yorkie]

I hope people don't mind but it's perhaps best that this thread is put on hold at the moment, as there's probably not much anyone can add (except speculation) at this stage.

When bnm has an update, I'll reopen the thread.

 

[bnm]

Final update on this matter.

Earlier this week I had correspondence with the Senior Customer Service Manager at FGW. Below are edited extracts from that correspondence. Some detail, that I do not wish to share, has been removed.

Dear *****,

Thank you for your recent correspondence with my colleague *****. I am very sorry for the delay to my response and am grateful for your patience in this matter. After reading through the relevant correspondence I can see this entire issue has left you feeling rather disillusioned with the service we provide. That is a matter of huge regret and I am sorry that a ticketing issue that should have taken 5 minutes to resolve is now a matter that has been raised with your MP.

To take each issue in turn:

14 January:
Your expereince at Paddington station on 14 January was extremely disappointing, to be told your valid ticket was invalid by various member of staff, that the conversation required the unnecessary presence of a security guard and the two hours it took for this matter to be clarified all add up to a pretty poor customer expereince and I am not surprised you felt so frustrated at the course of events that evening. There is clearly a training issue with regards to restriction codes with colleagues at Paddington in addition to the intransigent attitude you were faced with when trying to gain clarification on the validity of the ticket held.

To be clear this is not the sort of service we wish to provide and I am very sorry for the delay to your journey that evening and the difficulties you had in travelling with a valid ticket. I understand you were due to meet with the Station Manager at Paddington, to discuss your concerns and I am sorry that meeting did not happen but I would like to assure you that we have taken this matter seriously as we have no wish for anyone to have a similar expereince.

Cheque:
Your subsequent correspondence with my colleague ***** regarding this matter I can see has resulted in question marks over the cheque that was requested to refund the ticket held that day. I can see this refund took far longer to arrange than it should of and I am sorry for that delay. I can also see from our system that ***** requested the cheque on 5 February via our internal system & as per our process. When you enquired about the cheques location in early February ***** believed the delay was due to internal issues, specifically colleague absence within our finance team & responded accordingly. With hindsight she should have been more thorough.

Our subsequent investigation showed that due to an administration error the request ***** made had not reached our finance team. There was no attempt to deceive you and ***** responded to your correspondence on both occasions in good faith & I am very sorry the course of events led you to feel you were being lied to. It was somewhat a surprise when you reported in early March that you had still not received the cheque and ***** responded by apologising and suggesting a direct payment to resolve.

Data Protection Act concerns: (note: I raised this after I was told via personal message on an online forum that my name had been attached to a brief sent to staff - I asked for a copy of that brief)
The ticketing issue you disappointingly experienced Paddington in January was clarified to all staff via an internal retail briefing document for the team at Paddington and a further mention in a company wide retail document. Both with the intention of ensuring all were aware of the specific restriction. In the interests of transparency I have shared both documents. (note: those documents were included in this email)

At no point was any personal information regarding yourself mentioned in either document, it would have been completely inappropriate to do so and would have also been not relevant to the issue at hand - to ensure colleagues are aware of the specific restriction so that no other customer experiences such a poor service. One of the documents does mention a customer having a poor expereince and being denied travel but this was to highlight the impact when colleagues are unaware of such restrictions.

Thank you for your time today and for the opportunity to respond to your concerns personally. I recognise we have some way to go to regain your trust but I hope I've been able to demonstrate that we have not been careless with your personal data and did not look to deceive you regarding the issuing of the cheque.

Yours sincerely

***** ****

Customer Relations Manager
First Great Western

My response to that email (again, some edits of information I do not wish to share here):

Dear *****

Thank you for that comprehensive reply.

Confirmation that briefs have been sent out is welcome. As is confirmation on the 'F3' brief that it should be read and signed by staff.* I should point out though that my issue had nothing to do with the 'Network Area' easement. I hope this doesn't lead to confusion among staff.

My ticket was a Day Return for use wholly in the 'Network Area'.* The 'F3' brief says all the things I was saying to staff on the evening in question and I'm glad that my incident has highlighted a deficiency in the training of staff at Paddington. I don't blame the individuals wholly. They have some blame for their actions on the evening in question, but the majority of the blame falls squarely with higher management for failing to train staff adequately. A complex ticket system is not an excuse.

Concerns remain about the personal messages that I received (from online forum members identifying themselves as FGW staff) after I posted details of the incident on online.

Word reaches me from an acquaintance who was denied travel in mid March from Paddington in the evening with the return portion of a CDR Newbury - Canterbury West. Restriction code C4. They missed their intended train as a result. A staff conference (not unlike mine, but with a speedier resolution) confirmed validity. Fortunately for FGW this person doesn't wish to complain, as their arrival home was only delayed by 15 minutes. However it does highlight that problems persist.

I still have concerns about travelling through Paddington and have yet to make a similar journey at a similar time. That will happen soon and I really do hope my ticket will be accepted. You'll forgive me if I don't have unbounded optimism.

Then there's the time taken to deal with this complaint. Too many occasions when I've had to prompt FGW for a response/update. Had I not done so last week, I wonder whether I'd've heard from you today. Had I not done so when the cheque failed to materialise it seems I'd never have received it. All the proactivity has been on my part, and the impression I get from that is 'a couldn't care less' attitude from parts of FGW. Particularly when nothing of material has been offered by way of apology for the various failings. Only compensation for the delay in line with your Passenger Charter.

I continue to travel with FGW, both for work and pleasure. Just last week I used one of the recently introduced Pullman services (1803 from Plymouth) and tomorrow I shall be sampling brunch on the 1045 from Paddington (I'll be boarding at Reading). These services show FGW in a very good light and I've never had cause to complain about the staff. They are a credit to the company. It's just a shame that so many staff in other areas aren't.

I've decided to close correspondence with my MP as she hadn't, as far as I'm aware, contacted FGW prior to the prorogation of Parliament. London Travelwatch may still be contacted though. As for the Subject Access Request, I don't think I'll bother. I give enough money to FGW as it is.

Regards,

***** ******

I admit to a little fishing on my part in that reply above because sometimes words aren't always enough.

And the Customer Service Manager's reply:

Dear *****,

Thank you for your prompt response & I agree regarding the ticket restrictions. London Paddington is a very busy terminus and a working knowledge of all ticket restrictions is essential, however uncommon they may be. Yes, the specifics regarding F3 have been addressed with the station team but it would be foolish to see this instance in isolation and I have shared your comments with ***** (Paddington FGW Station Manager), particularly as you have highlighted a further example of colleagues being unaware of different restriction, although pleased that this was resolved far more quickly.

After speaking to *****, as well as several members of his team I am confident you will not have any problems when travelling through the station in the future. That said, I would be extremely interested in hearing about any aspect of your time at the station, particularly regarding interaction with First Great Western colleagues, that is not exemplary.

I appreciate that this matter has taken up a considerable amount of your time, not least at Paddington itself on 14 January and further appreciate that your complaint has not been motivated by any desire for compensation. So and as an appreciation of this time and as a gesture of goodwill I have asked a colleague to send (edited).

Really pleased to hear you have, and continue to enjoy our Pullman services. Following the news regarding the new franchise, commencing in September this year, we are entering into a period of considerable change.The Pullman service is one example of how enjoyable rail travel should be and we want the positive feelings it engenders to be felt for the service as a whole. Not something that will happen overnight but we are custodians of a special part of the railway and want to celebrate it's rich history. New trains will help of course & eradicating the intransigent attitudes of some colleagues, such as those you experienced at Paddington in January will help also & we are determined to provide a service that everyone in the West can be proud of.

Thank you again for your email and if you ever have any need to contact First Great Western in the future please email me directly and I will do my very best to help.

Kind regards

***** ****

Customer Service Manager
First Great Western

And the last word from me (hopefully!):

*****

I think on that note we can consider the matter resolved and closed.

Thank you for your input and responses.

Kind regards

***** ******

A resolution I'm happy with. I have the confirmation (rather than hearsay) that there has been re-training and briefs sent out. I have an assurance it won't happen to me again. And there's acknowledgment that it really shouldn't have taken this long to conclude the complaint to my satisfaction.

I do consider the matter closed.

I've decided not to share the two documents referenced in this correspondence. Ticketing rules and validities do change over time and these briefs, while current, may not be in the future. Posting them here means they could be lifted and misused. You can bet though that the next time I travel from Didcot to a station in Kent I shall be armed with copies of those briefs should I be returning through Paddington between 1600-1915 on a weekday!

 

[Starmill]

You can bet though that the next time I travel from Didcot to a station in Kent I shall be armed with copies of those briefs should I be returning through Paddington between 1600-1915 on a weekday!

I am pleased you have managed to get First Great Western to actually listen to you, I don't know how you do it, nobody else seems to manage.

But you had better check before you travel, because it may well be that next time you do you can expect to see the wording of the restriction code changed to prohibit departure from London Terminals between 1600 and 1915 as a result of this drawn out dispute!

 

[bnm]

I am pleased you have managed to get First Great Western to actually listen to you, I don't know how you do it, nobody else seems to manage.

But you had better check before you travel, because it may well be that next time you do you can expect to see the wording of the restriction code changed to prohibit departure from London Terminals between 1600 and 1915 as a result of this drawn out dispute!

From another source I've heard that FGW are not going to be requesting through ATOC that Southeastern (who 'own' the flows in question) change the restriction.

There are many other flows through Paddington and wholly in the 'Network Area' that are similarly unrestricted on the return portion and 'owned' by operators other than FGW. Could FGW request they are all changed? Possibly there could be such collusion - its happened before. Equally, the other operators could say no.

We'll cross that bridge when we come to it...

 

[bb21]

Congratulations on getting a satisfactory outcome eventually. I am sure the improvements (hopefully) will benefit not just you, but many forum members too. For that, I applaud your efforts on this matter.

 

[Greenback]

It's a shame that it all took so long.

 

[bnm]

The greater shame is that it happened in the first place.

 

[Greenback]

I agree. As I've said before, there is too much reliance by some staff on what colleagues say in the mess room, and too little efforts made by the TOC's to change things by way of more effective communication and supervision.

 

[Starmill]

From another source I've heard that FGW are not going to be requesting through ATOC that Southeastern (who 'own' the flows in question) change the restriction.

There are many other flows through Paddington and wholly in the 'Network Area' that are similarly unrestricted on the return portion and 'owned' by operators other than FGW. Could FGW request they are all changed? Possibly there could be such collusion - its happened before. Equally, the other operators could say no.

We'll cross that bridge when we come to it...

Which will not be very long now, because of your actions! I'm not blaming you for it, that ticket is of no use to me whatsoever anyway and to someone on my budget £55 is still way too much. But all they have to do is take over the flow and stick their own restriction code in - and as a result of your dispute, this discrepancy is at the forefront of the minds of certain managers, I'm sure. I doubt Southeastern would put up a fight given the FGW journey is slightly longer, and all they want to do is push people into buying a more expensive ticket anyway.

 

[bnm]

Which will not be very long now, because of your actions!

My actions? Being denied travel for two hours with a perfectly valid ticket and then complaining. What should I have done? Put up and shut up? Sorry, not my style.

You say you are not blaming me in one sentence but all the others describe what FGW might do because of my actions. But it's okay because you are not affected by something that may (I believe it won't) happen in the future? Why bother bringing it up then?

So it's somehow all going to be my fault if FGW lobby to change the restrictions, something I have been told by a well placed source is NOT going to happen.

 

[talldave]

bnm you did everything you should have done, well done for persevering.

 

[bnm]

Guess what?

I travelled from Didcot to Kent today. On a ticket with the same restrictions as in January. Did everything go smoothly at Paddington this evening? What do you think?

Here's the email I sent to the Customer Relations Manager soon after boarding:

*****,

Another trip from Didcot to Kent today with an 'F3' ticket. Held up and quizzed about my journey at the Paddington gateline by <redacted> this evening. Initially told not valid, then told to take the 1706 which doesn't even go to Didcot. Then had to wait while <redacted> checked validity on NRE with his phone. So still the message isn't getting through. Unsure whether <redacted> found the right info before I mentioned the memo and being the person who complained in January. Let through with two minutes to spare.

Forgive my bluntness, but still not bloody good enough. Matter reopened and all correspondence going to London Travelwatch.

***** ******

Okay, so I was able to board (just) my chosen train tonight, but I was still told my ticket wasn't valid, given duff information about an alternative train, and held up causing a queue to form behind me.

One muppet still alive and well at Paddington. :roll::-x

 

[crehld]

So reading previous correspondence you've had, FGW promised that the specifics of the F3 restriction had been communicated to staff at Paddington. The fact this continues to happen means they either lied to you about that or they have some serious personnel management issues with rogue members of staff who fail to follow company policy and the instructions of their management. Either way, the company needs to get a grip of the situation!

 

[RJ]

So reading previous correspondence you've had, FGW promised that the specifics of the F3 restriction had been communicated to staff at Paddington. The fact this continues to happen means they either lied to you about that or they have some serious personnel management issues with rogue members of staff who fail to follow company policy and the instructions of their management. Either way, the company needs to get a grip of the situation!

To be honest, management should strive to do better than paying lip service to complaints. They should train the staff on how the check restrictions on tickets they aren't familiar with. If they are empowered with the skills they need to do their job properly, they get into less arguments and customers are happy, so you get less complaints. Win/win.

 

[Greenback]

Although it's good that you weren't delayed enough to miss the train this time, it's still not right that you should have to go through this sort of thing when you are travelling on a valid ticket.

FGW still have a lot to do, despite what they say in their communications.

 

[secludedsfx]

Guess what?

I travelled from Didcot to Kent today. On a ticket with the same restrictions as in January. Did everything go smoothly at Paddington this evening? What do you think?

Here's the email I sent to the Customer Relations Manager soon after boarding:



Okay, so I was able to board (just) my chosen train tonight, but I was still told my ticket wasn't valid, given duff information about an alternative train, and held up causing a queue to form behind me.

One muppet still alive and well at Paddington. :roll::-x

I'm sorry but you cannot expect everyone to know the ins and outs of ticketing (especially with an obscure ticket like that) and I assume you were rude to him as well as it sounds like you were from the fact you've called him a muppet on here.

 

[deltic]

I'm sorry but you cannot expect everyone to know the ins and outs of ticketing (especially with an obscure ticket like that) and I assume you were rude to him as well as it sounds like you were from the fact you've called him a muppet on here.

No-one is saying staff should know every ticket restriction off by heart. What they are saying is that if they dont know they shouldnt be making up the rules on the spot but should know how to check them quickly without delaying the passenger.

In addition in this case management had supposedly ensured all staff had been briefed specifically on this issue.

 

[Agent_c]

I'm sorry but you cannot expect everyone to know the ins and outs of ticketing (especially with an obscure ticket like that) and I assume you were rude to him as well as it sounds like you were from the fact you've called him a muppet on here.

I would expect someone who has been the recent recipient of a buliten/memo (and seemed to be familiar with it when it was mentioned) to correctly apply that rule.

 

[bnm]

I'm sorry but you cannot expect everyone to know the ins and outs of ticketing (especially with an obscure ticket like that) and I assume you were rude to him as well as it sounds like you were from the fact you've called him a muppet on here.

Yep, that's right. I was rude, demanding, aggressive, threatening. Just as I was back in January.

I identified myself as well before totally losing the plot so I can expect a knock on the door from BTP sometime soon I expect.

Odd that I was allowed to travel after being so obnoxious. Odd that I have an ongoing dialogue with FGW management despite me being rude to their staff.

:roll::roll::roll:

I am able to use different emotions as a situation demands. Calm and rational when dealing with poorly trained (or just not bothered to learn) gateline staff and letting off steam later on on my keyboard.

So, don't make assumptions. I'll assume you're a muppet otherwise.

Staff on gatelines enforcing restrictions should absolutely know what's allowed and not allowed. Especially after they've been reminded with two memos.

Pray tell, what is obscure about a ticket from Didcot to Dartford?

 

[secludedsfx]

No-one is saying staff should know every ticket restriction off by heart. What they are saying is that if they dont know they shouldnt be making up the rules on the spot but should know how to check them quickly without delaying the passenger.

In addition in this case management had supposedly ensured all staff had been briefed specifically on this issue.

But if the ticket says off peak, has no restriction code and he's trying to travel at peak what do you expect?

Hold up everyone who has similar tickets and contact NRE, taking up precious time and delaying other passengers?

 

[bnm]

Hold up everyone who has similar tickets and contact NRE, taking up precious time and delaying other passengers?

Exactly what happened to me last night. It's not acceptable to do that.

 

[secludedsfx]

Exactly what happened to me last night. It's not acceptable to do that.

Exactly, so don't go out of your way to get tickets printed with avantix machines from Didcot (so then you get the restriction code).

Simple.

 

[Merseysider]

I'm sorry but you cannot expect everyone to know the ins and outs of ticketing (especially with an obscure ticket like that) and I assume you were rude to him as well as it sounds like you were from the fact you've called him a muppet on here.

Sorry, but that is a load of crap. The ticket is in no way obscure. It is quite reasonable to expect one's journey not to be delayed by poorly trained staff. It is also quite reasonable to expect that after repeated correspondence, management would have got word to staff on the ground to check if unsure, instead of making assumptions. It is also quite reasonable to expect such incompetence to be addressed first time around, and not have it happen again.

 

[bnm]

Exactly, so don't go out of your way to get tickets printed with avantix machines from Didcot (so then you get the restriction code).

Simple.

Who's said anything about me going out of my way to buy tickets from Avantix?

 

[swt_passenger]

But if the ticket says off peak, has no restriction code and he's trying to travel at peak what do you expect?

It will have a restriction code, whether its printed on the ticket or not. There are dozens of them though, and unwillingness of some staff to understand the ramifications of that is the only issue here.

There's a parallel with the assumption that seems more prevalent around the London area that 'off-peak starts at 0930' which leads to similar gateline 'discussions' as reported here every few months...

 

[najaB]

Exactly, so don't go out of your way to get tickets printed with avantix machines from Didcot (so then you get the restriction code).

Simple.

Curiously, I collected tickets from the ticket window and they have the restriction code printed on them.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Exactly, so don't go out of your way to get tickets printed with avantix machines from Didcot (so then you get the restriction code).

Simple.

What the hell are you on about? The restriction of the ticket depends on the flow (origin station, destination station, route) and the ticket type, not whatever code is printed on the corner of the ticket. Different machines print different things but these do not affect validity.

I bet you work on the Paddington gateline :roll: