FGW Buy before you board policy

[Class377]

I think you actually mean accepting cash as a valid payment method, and having card only TVMs gives people a valid reason to pay on board, which is their first opportunity.

Yes, it does give people a valid reason to pay on board, but my point was more along the lines of it makes it easier for a fare dodger as well, which we don't want.

Consider someone who has no intention of paying until challenged, but is also aware of the penalties (including the risk of prosecution) and will try to avoid them. If they have a card on them with the funds, they only need carry a few quid in cash to cover the fare as well to have an excuse of not being able to use the machine. This also means that if, as can sometimes happen in FGW land, they don't see a conductor on board, they need only walk out at their end station to avoid a fare.

If there was a revenue block at their end station.the only thing they'd have to do is pay the relevant fare alongside law-abiding passengers who genuinely intended to pay for their ticket. However, if the rules meant they HAD to pay if they had the relevant form of payment that the machine would accept, they'd be bang to rights and have to be written up whilst the law-abiding passengers would be allowed to buy as normal!

As an aside, if the railway only accepted cash and someone turned up with not enough cash (or some cash, but didn't want to use it) they'd be treated as a "can't pay won't pay" passenger and dealt with appropriately. Allowing someone to refuse to pay with a certain type of payment when they have the ability to seems, to me at least, just another opportunity for some to play the system.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Yes, it does give people a valid reason to pay on board, but my point was more along the lines of it makes it easier for a fare dodger as well, which we don't want.

. . .

Allowing someone to refuse to pay with a certain type of payment when they have the ability to seems, to me at least, just another opportunity for some to play the system.

Indeed. Which is one very good reason why such a 'policy' will not be published; and if it is not published, it doesn't exist.

That is not to say that front line staff, who are in the best position to assess the circumstances, will not exercise their judgement and discretion in choosing a response to the non-ticket-holding passenger, and that investigating staff with the time and opportunity to re-assess the circumstances will not exercise their own judgement and discretion in a similar manner before reaching a decision on how to proceed, if at all.

 

[Coolzac]

I think in this thread people have got away from a fundamental fact- you should be able to pay for the train ticket you require with cash. If the train companies cannot provide that, then fine. They mustn't then however accuse people of fare evading!

If you require a ticket which you cannot for one reason or another obtain from the ticket machine, the logical thing for any unassuming member of the public is surely to get it from the conductor?

Yes it might open up the possibility of people not paying for a ticket, but ultimately then the train companies must make it possible to buy the full range of tickets that you need before you board if they are that desperate to stop people evading fares.


The train companies cannot have it both ways!

 

[yorkie]

Yes, it does give people a valid reason to pay on board, but my point was more along the lines of it makes it easier for a fare dodger as well, which we don't want.

You are seriously saying that the installation of card-only TVMs should restrict passenger choices of payment methods, because the TOC does not want people to be able to use cash on board?

The TOC has to let people pay by cash (if they don't want to do that, they can not bid for the franchise!) and it's the TOCs decision whether they install facilities at the origin, or allow it on board.

Consider someone who has no intention of paying until challenged, but is also aware of the penalties (including the risk of prosecution) and will try to avoid them. If they have a card on them with the funds, they only need carry a few quid in cash to cover the fare as well to have an excuse of not being able to use the machine. This also means that if, as can sometimes happen in FGW land, they don't see a conductor on board, they need only walk out at their end station to avoid a fare.

If the TOC wishes to 'consider' the scenario of someone selecting to pay with a payment method that the TOC is obliged to accept, and yet doesn't actually provide a facility for, then I respectfully suggest that the TOC installs such a facility for such payments to be made.

If there was a revenue block at their end station.the only thing they'd have to do is pay the relevant fare alongside law-abiding passengers who genuinely intended to pay for their ticket.

That's a problem of the TOCs own making.

However, if the rules meant they HAD to pay if they had the relevant form of payment that the machine would accept, they'd be bang to rights and have to be written up whilst the law-abiding passengers would be allowed to buy as normal!

So, someone presents cash, you want to do what exactly to determine if they have a card, and if they do, that they have sufficient funds on that card, and that the card is not a company card, and that it is entirely their card and they would have been able to pay with that card? Also, if paying with that card would have been possible but only if a financial penalty was incurred, does that count as "had the relevant form of payment"?

I'd be very interested to hear how you propose to carry out such research...

As an aside, if the railway only accepted cash and someone turned up with not enough cash (or some cash, but didn't want to use it) they'd be treated as a "can't pay won't pay" passenger and dealt with appropriately. Allowing someone to refuse to pay with a certain type of payment when they have the ability to seems, to me at least, just another opportunity for some to play the system.

If a passenger brings with them an acceptable payment method, they pay at the first opportunity.

If the TOC does not give them such an opportunity at their origin station, that's not the passengers fault.

Hopefully in a few weeks time there will be a published policy on this, and we can put the matter to bed.

 

[Busaholic]

Most people, on due reflection, would not think it a great idea that the police be made responsible for making our laws - sometimes it is hard enough to get them to take action on laws that have been enacted by our democratic representatives. In the same way, why should train companies, which are just commercial organisations unelected by any of us, issue regulations which may not be seen by the general public, are sometimes opaque and capable of different interpretations, often by untrained and (apparently, reading threads here) aggressive staff and may lead to criminal records or, at the very least, time wasted by law-abiding people whose only 'crime' was to take a train under the blissful illusion that they could go to the station and pay the correct fare for their desired journey, in cash if they so chose?

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is not to say that front line staff, who are in the best position to assess the circumstances, will not exercise their judgement and discretion in choosing a response to the non-ticket-holding passenger, and that investigating staff with the time and opportunity to re-assess the circumstances will not exercise their own judgement and discretion in a similar manner before reaching a decision on how to proceed, if at all.

Which would be all very well if front-line staff all did exercise that discretion (they have with me, LM South RPIs are very reasonable, I find). However not all do. Therefore it might be best for everyone if the rules were clear, published and stuck to.

Neil

 

[Haywain]

Which would be all very well if front-line staff all did exercise that discretion (they have with me, LM South RPIs are very reasonable, I find). However not all do. Therefore it might be best for everyone if the rules were clear, published and stuck to.

Neil

You appear to make the common mistake of believing that using discretion means making a decision that is in the customer's favour. It actually means having the freedom to decide what should be done in a particular situation, and this may not end up in the customer's favour in every case. Therefore the decision reached can not be used as evidence that discretion has not been excercised.

 

[Coolzac]

In the same way, why should train companies, which are just commercial organisations unelected by any of us, issue regulations which may not be seen by the general public, are sometimes opaque and capable of different interpretations, often by untrained and (apparently, reading threads here) aggressive staff and may lead to criminal records or, at the very least, time wasted by law-abiding people whose only 'crime' was to take a train under the blissful illusion that they could go to the station and pay the correct fare for their desired journey, in cash if they so chose?

Absolutely! Also, more than once I have been given conflicting information by different conductors. If they don't know the rules, how are the general public expected to know?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You appear to make the common mistake of believing that using discretion means making a decision that is in the customer's favour. It actually means having the freedom to decide what should be done in a particular situation, and this may not end up in the customer's favour in every case.

True. The problem with using discretion generally is that it is intrinsically unfair, because not every RPI will work the same way. Thus the rules should be reasonable and fixed, as it ensures everyone will be treated the same way, which is the fairest you're reasonably likely to achieve given that an RPI can't understand every situation. Or if discretion is shown, it should tip in *favour* of the customer only from a set of rules that are basically reasonable. I don't think that is the case now.

(My case involved a wish to use RTVs when Bletchley ticket office was closed due to staff shortage, FWIW.)

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

Absolutely! Also, more than once I have been given conflicting information by different conductors. If they don't know the rules, how are the general public expected to know?

That's because the rules are *too complicated*. But I think the TOCs like that, as it gives them the upper hand.

The rules, just like the fare system, should be:-
1. Simple
2. Clear
3. Published, not just in a book, but on clear posters at all stations.

So, for instance, from a given station either cash is accepted or it is not. Or another workaround is found, such as adding PERTIS type machines which could be more secure than traditional cash-accepting ticket machines because there would be no need to give change. Or you could install on-board ticket machines like the Germans do. There are lots of options.

Neil

 

[yorkie]

(My case involved a wish to use RTVs when Bletchley ticket office was closed due to staff shortage, FWIW.)

RTVs are a valid payment method, and if the ticket office is closed there is no opportunity to use them at the origin.

There's no "discretion" involved in allowing people to pay with RTVs; that's the rules!

 

[Bletchleyite]

RTVs are a valid payment method, and if the ticket office is closed there is no opportunity to use them at the origin.

There's no "discretion" involved in allowing people to pay with RTVs; that's the rules!

I was fairly sure that RTVs were an exception in that you did have to use them at a staffed ticket office prior to travel, and not on board or at the destination. Or was that the case and it changed?

Neil

 

[yorkie]

I was fairly sure that RTVs were an exception in that you did have to use them at a staffed ticket office prior to travel...

If the ticket office is open, yes. If not, you buy on-board (or at destination if there is no opportunity on board)

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/45185.aspx

The following are accepted as methods of payments at National Rail stations and retail outlets. They also apply to paying on-train when no opportunity to purchase beforehand existed....

 

[najaB]

The following are accepted as methods of payments at National Rail stations and retail outlets. They also apply to paying on-train when no opportunity to purchase beforehand existed....

So.... suppose I wanted to pay with RTVs and passed a card-only TVM, but I had a card on me. Oh no! Can open, worms everywhere!

 

[Flamingo]

Which would be all very well if front-line staff all did exercise that discretion (they have with me, LM South RPIs are very reasonable, I find). However not all do. Therefore it might be best for everyone if the rules were clear, published and stuck to.

Neil

The rules are clear and published. However, if you really think I should be charging people who have missed their stop or boarded the wrong train a new ticket back, for example, that's fine by me, I get a cut.

The rules should always be implemented is a slippery road...

 

[CC 72100]

I hope you asked FGW to refund the £1? If not, please do as I'd be interested to hear the response.

I suspect they will say that you don't have to buy a more expensive ticket under Condition 3, but it would be good to have confirmation of this.

No - at the time I was busy and so didn't follow it up. Should I have? Technically yes. Did I have the time in the middle of exams period for £1? Not really.

It would be interesting to find out the response, I agree, and so will contact them should the situation arise again.

Originally posted by RPI
I'll be honest, I struggle to believe the contents of the original post in this thread as after 1800 all of the local RPI'S will willing sell a Devon evening ranger if asked for one if the customer has traveled from a station with no ticket office, believe me, I have first hand knowledge of this process.

I appreciate your honesty and input on the thread - it is always good to have somebody 'on-board' with direct involvement.

While I applaud the common sense approach that has been taken, for me, until I have written proof from FGW themselves that this is the official policy, will seek to comply with condition 3. This goes down to purely covering my own backside - the big warning tells me about having a ticket, and while you've explained the actual reality 'on the ground', for me the official line has to take precedent, to cover me in all scenarios.

As I have said, in my situation I asked the station manager what to do, who said they I had to go back and by a ticket (meet condition 3) as opposed to "wait around coach E and just check with TM when he's opened the doors if you can get a ticket after you leave Exeter" or the like.

Originally posted by Yorkie
RTVs are a valid payment method, and if the ticket office is closed there is no opportunity to use them at the origin.

There's no "discretion" involved in allowing people to pay with RTVs; that's the rules!

So technically, according to the "Card only TVM does NOT equal opportunity to buy" argument, I could forever walk around saying that I want to pay with RTVs, knowing that a) only humans can deal with them and b) that on certain routes/ times of day encountering a human rail staff is rare and as a result never purchase a ticket, being sold a ticket no questions asked when I do eventually come across one.

What I've written above sounds very stupid, but following your argument, that's what I've come to :?

 

[Flamingo]

What about people who pass a card-only TVM but want to pay by card?

 

[WelshBluebird]

What about people who pass a card-only TVM but want to pay by card?

What happened to using common sense?

If someone passes a card only TVM and does not have a valid reason why they didn't use it and wants to pay by card, then that fairly obviously means they did ignore an opportunity to pay. If someone does the same but is paying cash, then they didn't have an opportunity to pay.

A simple, common sense based approach. Easy.
Obviously you will have people who try it on, but you do atm anyway. And as you said earlier in the thread, in reality this would affect just a few people as most people who don't pay don't use the "I wanted to pay by cash by the machine doesnt take cash" reason.

 

[yorkie]

The rules should always be implemented is a slippery road...

Agreed! I'd happily put my trust in people like you, RPI, Trentside, TheEdge, ANorthernGuard, reb0118 etc etc to use your judgement and I wouldn't want that leeway to be removed from you.

The answer, in my opinion, isn't a rigid application of rules, but there are certain scenarios that should be clarified, and discretion should always be an option.

No - at the time I was busy and so didn't follow it up. Should I have? Technically yes. Did I have the time in the middle of exams period for £1? Not really.

It's not about £1, but the principle, and if nothing else I'm interested in what they'd say.

How recent was it? If it was recent I'll write it for you

While I applaud the common sense approach that has been taken, for me, until I have written proof from FGW themselves that this is the official policy, will seek to comply with condition 3.

Agreed. You even if the occasion you overpaid was a while ago, you can still write to them regarding future journeys, citing that as an example and stating you're not asking for the £1 back but merely asking for clarification as to what to do in future.

What about people who pass a card-only TVM but want to pay by card?

If they pass a working card-only TVM and then hand over a card to you for payment on board, then you are entitled to refuse to sell them anything other than the full undiscounted Anytime fare, as per the NRCoC.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I think this might only happen at some stations? One of my cards doesn't work in Avantices and in other places where offline authorisation is required, but it works in every TVM I've tried it in.

My card will not work in any SWT TVM unless I am using it for ToD. Which has been my way around when I have had to get an early train and the ticket office was shut.

I have since moved and guess what. Unstaffed station, card only TVM.

 

[Flamingo]

If they pass a working card-only TVM and then hand over a card to you for payment on board, then you are entitled to refuse to sell them anything other than the full undiscounted Anytime fare, as per the NRCoC.

The problem is, in most cases I have no idea if the TVM is cash and card or care only, and no realistic timely way of finding out. Indeed, I might have missed the message saying it's broken. However, I can think of very few people who tell me the machine is broken, and nobody has ever told me the machine is card only and they only have cash.

 

[yorkie]

The problem is, in most cases I have no idea if the TVM is cash and card or care only, and no realistic timely way of finding out...

If I was in this position, I'd be asking my boss if he/she would like to supply the relevant information, and what their expectations are.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So.... suppose I wanted to pay with RTVs and passed a card-only TVM, but I had a card on me. Oh no! Can open, worms everywhere!

This was exactly the position I was in. I could have used the RTVs next time, but I wanted to use them then. I had specifically arrived at the station early in order to have time to queue for the ticket office to use them, normally I cut it fine and use the machine which normally has no queue. So I decided I would be using them. Fortunately the RPIs on duty agreed.

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

Agreed! I'd happily put my trust in people like you, RPI, Trentside, TheEdge, ANorthernGuard, reb0118 etc etc to use your judgement and I wouldn't want that leeway to be removed from you.

The answer, in my opinion, isn't a rigid application of rules, but there are certain scenarios that should be clarified

I certainly think the definition of "an opportunity to pay" should be made in writing and displayed on things like PF rules posters. It should also be nationally consistent.

It might be enough to change it to "an opportunity to pay[1] using your chosen method of payment accepted by the Train Operating Company", or "an opportunity to pay using any method of payment carried with you on your journey, regardless if this is your preferred method of payment".

Those two would seem to clarify the two interpretations we are getting in this thread.

[1] Also to pay what - the specific ticket you require, or any ticket covering part of your journey (i.e NCOC 3).

Neil

 

[Flamingo]

If I was in this position, I'd be asking my boss if he/she would like to supply the relevant information, and what their expectations are.

I refer the honourable member to my previous answer...

 

[yorkie]

I don't know what the previous answer to that was, but I suspect from what you've said before it was along the lines that your boss wants you to always apply discretion.

If that's what you've been told to do, then that's the end of that.

But if the rail industry was to get its act together and have staff fully informed of what facilities were available, you would be entitled to charge people the full undiscounted Anytime fare for walking past a ticket office/TVM that accepted their chosen payment method.

If the information isn't available to enable you to do that, that's a failing of management, for which you have our sympathy but there's nothing we can do about it.

 

[island]

I refer the honourable member to my previous answer...

A question not for you, but wider: isn't FGW required to make available information on TVM availability to staff as a condition of operating a Penalty Fares scheme?

 

[PermitToTravel]

The FGW penalty fares scheme commits them only to paging authorised collectors about TVM faults. In the case of excessive queues it states very ambiguously "A message will be paged out to all On-Train Staff alerting the Authorised Collectors to problems with queues at stated station"

 

[Flamingo]

Which we get.

 

[PermitToTravel]

So you know if a TVM's temporarily not accepting cash, but not if it's permanently not doing so? What a silly system