fgw revenue protection

[sonic2009]

Revenue protection staff on the trains in bristol area can they issues penalty fares.. Not recived one just asking a question.. Please move my post if in wrong section

 

[ralphchadkirk]

If they're Revenue Protection Inspectors and all the PF rules have been proved (i.e. compulsory ticket are etc) then yes.

 

[OwlMan]

Depends on the TOC Bristol is only a penalty fare area for FGW not XC or ATW.

Peter

 

[Mojo]

From when the PF scheme was introduced they could not, only Revenue Protection Managers could. Then all the managers left or changed jobs and the PF scheme was not enforced (and publically advertised as such). RPIs spent most of this time acting as ATEs on busy trains with lots of unstaffed stations. Since the Bristol area PF scheme started being enforced earlier this year then RPIs and lots of gateline staff became authorised.

 

[sonic2009]

From when the PF scheme was introduced they could not, only Revenue Protection Managers could. Then all the managers left or changed jobs and the PF scheme was not enforced (and publically advertised as such). RPIs spent most of this time acting as ATEs on busy trains with lots of unstaffed stations. Since the Bristol area PF scheme started being enforced earlier this year then RPIs and lots of gateline staff became authorised.

So surely when I was on the 0708 wsm to bpw.. Weston to bristol parkway.. A revenue protection officer complete with pf book did not issue pf to the 5 people without a ticket getting on @ weston. With both self service machines working and 2 windows open. Surely enough change to buy a ticket with weston super mare clearly showing penalty fare information

 

[imagination]

So surely when I was on the 0708 wsm to bpw.. Weston to bristol parkway.. A revenue protection officer complete with pf book did not issue pf to the 5 people without a ticket getting on @ weston. With both self service machines working and 2 windows open. Surely enough change to buy a ticket with weston super mare clearly showing penalty fare information

Maybe they were just being lenient?

I've had people be lenient with me over PFs before now when I've had to dash for a train.

 

[sonic2009]

Maybe they were just being lenient?

I've had people be lenient with me over PFs before now when I've had to dash for a train.

ok.. but still what is the point in having PFs? the rules are that you must have a valid ticket for travel before boarding a train. they need to either sort the PFs System out.. because if you think about the many people who jump the trains each day..

 

[222007]

If they're Revenue Protection Inspectors and all the PF rules have been proved (i.e. compulsory ticket are etc) then yes.

Yes they can issue penalty fares my TOC has worked closely with FGW over the last couple of months with them issuing penalty fares and our guys MG11's

 

[Mojo]

Was it definitely an RPI and not an ATE? It could be that the RPI was not an authorised collector or the passengers asked before boarding.

 

[scotsman]

Decided he was fighting a losing battle? Didn't want to do 5 PFs, knowing that he'd probably miss out other people without tickets in the process? Or, more than likely, he wasn't authorised?

 

[bnm]

Depends on the TOC Bristol is only a penalty fare area for FGW not XC or ATW.

Peter

Only certain stations in the Bristol 'area' are Penalty Fares stations, not the whole 'area'.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Documents/Custom/Penalty Fares maps.pdf

 

[yorkie]

ok.. but still what is the point in having PFs? the rules are that you must have a valid ticket for travel before boarding a train.

You answered your own question in the next sentence, that is the point, that people "must" have a valid ticket before boarding. However there is no real point in my opinion, as they are an excuse to cut down on on-train staff and harass genuine customers who have made mistakes. The theory is that the threat of a higher fare will make people buy before boarding but checks are done far less regularly, this doesn't actually deter people. The actual evaders just get away with it because it is too much hassle and/or too risky to issue them with PFs or they will just leg it at the next stop, etc. After all the DfT's PF policy says "avoid conflicts"! It seems daft, unfair and counter-productive that a dodgy looking gang will be overlooked while an easy target will be, well, targeted.

The FGW PF scheme in the Bristol/South West areas is different to most others (generally former NSE area, with some exceptions e.g. the Birmingham area) and should (IMO) be illegal as it does not comply with the DfT's PF policy, such as "The basic principle of any penalty fares scheme is that passengers must buy their tickets before they get on their train. If passengers find that they can buy their ticket on the train from the conductor or guard, it undermines this message."

The PF area is highly dodgy too, the policy states:
"5.8 The description of the scheme must name the train services which are to be penalty fares trains. This may be done by area or by route, for example, 'All train services operated by [name of operator] within the area bounded by
[list of boundary stations]' or 'All train services operated by [name of operator] on the following routes: station x to station y, station p to station q'.
5.9 A map or plan should be included showing the routes and area which the scheme will cover."

FGW comply with 5.9 by issuing a map but do not appear to comply with 5.8. There are many gaps in the PF scheme. A passenger travelling on a London - Penzance via Bristol train enters and leaves a PF area on numerous occasions. This should (IMO) be considered unacceptable and a breach of condition 5.8.

222007 hints at what I believe may be dodgy practices going on between XC & FGW as the policy states "Passengers travelling on the trains of another train operator cannot be charged a penalty fare if that operator does not have a penalty fares scheme" so I fail to see how XC and FGW can "work closely" on issuing PFs.

You cannot rely on the TOCs to follow the rules when it comes to PFs. Yet they demand that passengers follow the rules, despite the UK ticketing system being incredibly difficult to understand that most guards/RPIs do not fully understand all the rules. Hmm...

 

[RPI]

Sorry to drag up an old thread but just wanted to input on this, all tickets issued on train by FGW guards carry a warning that if a PF collector had been checking tickets then they may be issued with a PF and non PF collectors are also meant to give a verbal warning to the passenger, this is I believe a requirement for all PF schemes where most trains have guards and was certainly stated in the application to DFT, the reason why there are 3 different schemes is due to the DFT, who were concerned that if all FGW routes were PF then it would be quite extreme for someone arriving at Padd from say Swansea to be charged twice the Open single, the FGW schemes all operate independently of each other, therefore if someon joins at Bristol TM for example and isn't checked until Plymouth then they cant be PF'd unless they are caught before leaving the first PF scheme (before Taunton) this is a safeguard basicly as DFT dont like PF schemes on intercity routes.

The FGW scheme in the west is particularly important as most services (local) are operated with 14x and 150/1 units in multiple with other units therefore making half of the train un-workable for the conductor, this scheme has made a huge difference in the number of opportunists trying it on, and now tht staff are spending less time selling tickets to people who should have bought them before travelling they have more time to deal with the "hard core" dodgers.

Also, the Central and West PF schemes were not enforced at all until April this year despite DFT giving permission as from 31/03/2007, FGW thought it in-appropriate to issue PF's when their performence was dire in 2007/08.

 

[Striker]

It seems daft, unfair and counter-productive that a dodgy looking gang will be overlooked while an easy target will be, well, targeted.

That's Britain in 2010!

I'm glad I left the complete dump!

 

[Flamingo]

all tickets issued on train by FGW guards carry a warning that if a PF collector had been checking tickets then they may be issued with a PF

wrong - depends on the depot and the ticket stock, also guards from different depots pass through PF areas and non PF areas in the same journey.

I have seen the tickets mentioned, but they are certainly not issued in South Wales for example.

 

[Nick O. Teen]

wrong - depends on the depot and the ticket stock, also guards from different depots pass through PF areas and non PF areas in the same journey.

I have seen the tickets mentioned, but they are certainly not issued in South Wales for example.

The whole thing's confusing. I work the Reading - Gatport Airwick route, part of which is in a PF zone, and part of which isn't.

Also, all the automated ticket machines along that line of route have been made card-only payment. Owing to persistent vandalism, cash acceptance has been disabled for the foreseeable. Therefore, anyone wishing to comply with the rule that tickets must be purchased before boarding but wishing also to pay cash is unwittingly, in theory, liable for a PF.

But I'm a guard/conductor, not an RPI, and therefore cannot issue a PF even if I wanted to.

As the Septics say, go figure....

 

[MikeWh]

No, you cannot be issued with a PF if there were not the facilities to purchase your ticket using your desired method of payment at the station where you started your journey. If there is only a machine and it only accepts credit cards then if you offer cash to the RPI they will have to sell you a ticket.

 

[Greenback]

The FGW PF schemes illustrate what is wrong with the whole concept. There are too many diferent schemes, it's often a lottery as to whether a customer is able to get a ticket, and services call at staions where PF's are in force and others where they aren't.

What a shambles, typical of the UK rail system in 2010.

 

[scotsman]

Take Bath for example, covered in PF posters, crammed with tourists in the middle of summer and the gates to the car park and the ticket barriers are left wide open

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . . the DFT . . . were concerned that if all FGW routes were PF then it would be quite extreme for someone arriving at Padd from say Swansea to be charged twice the Open single, . . .

. . . . DFT dont like PF schemes on intercity routes.

That much is perfectly reasonable - PFs are not appropriate for inter-city / long-distance travel, and TOCs will have plenty time on those services to inspect tickets and, if necessary, offer alternatives such as a new ticket or an Excess.

I don't approve of PFs in general, but would be outraged if they were issued on those longer journeys!

 

[tinselworm]

It should be worth mentioning that although Worle is marked as a penalty fare station, there is no way physical of buying tickets at the station itself as the ticket machine was removed about 2 years ago, and therefore you cannot be fined for travelling from there without a ticket.

 

[RPI]

wrong - depends on the depot and the ticket stock, also guards from different depots pass through PF areas and non PF areas in the same journey.

I have seen the tickets mentioned, but they are certainly not issued in South Wales for example.

If the trains worked from that depot pass through PF schemes then the ticket stock should have the warning on the back.

Also, if the machines are card only then quite rightly PF's cannot be issued unless there is a ticket office aswell.

The only area where the PF scheme on FGW seems to work well is the west, all of the machines still take cash and seldom get vandalised (famous last words!), lets not forget, a £20 PF is actually the soft option because every single person who joins from a station with ticket issuing facilities (even outside the PF areas) is liable to prosecution under byelaw 18(1) which usually ends up in a fine of around £75-350 for a first offence, PF's were designed to keep such offences out of court.

 

[Greenback]

Then they simply don't work, except in raising revenue for the TOC. The official line when they were introduced by BR was that they were a deterrent to fare dodging. They clearly aren't! A proper deterrent would be court!

You are right, it is the soft option for the fare evader, but it is the hard option for those who have made a genuine mistake, or have been unable to buy the ticket they need and are then met with an obstinate member of staff, in all likelihood not as well trained as they should be, who does not fully understand the complexities of the system, or who are engaged in some ridiculous competiton with their colelagues to issue the most PF's in a month.

I'm not saying that happens on FGW, but we have all seen and read the reports from people that have fallen foul of the PF system. I'm with DaveNewcastle, I;m not in favour of them.

 

[RPI]

Everyone has their own views on the subject but lets face it, if everyone was honest then there would never be any need for PF's, i've been an RPI for 10 years and it is amazing how low some people will stoop to avoid a fare, I know that with FGW PF's are not issued to fare evaders (maybe occasionally to the odd adult on a child ticket) fare evaders are reported for prosecution, lets also not forget that you cannot PF somebody on a restricted ticket or someone who is off route so all the horror stories about people being PF'd for being on the wrong train are a myth, most of these horror stories are usually to do with guards and not RP staff! PF's work very well when used with common sense and I will be the first to conceed that some TOC's RPI's leave a lot to be desired, we all know which ones, the same ones that end up on forums and in the media etc, it's not often that you see many stories about FGW's inspectors on these forums as the degree of training is actually quite customer focused.

 

[moonrakerz]

Take Bath for example, covered in PF posters, crammed with tourists in the middle of summer and the gates to the car park and the ticket barriers are left wide open

Does Bath now comply with the Rules laid down by DfT for a PF area ? Last time I had a look it certainly didn't - there were only two PF notices; one of which was almost invisible and the other on the way to one platform only.

Greenback is partially correct when he says there are too many schemes. It is more complex than that: the TOCs are running all sorts of PF (and similar) schemes that are all different because they do not comply with the laid down rules.
I am surprised that no one has yet taken this to a high level Court and forced the TOCs to follow the rules that are laid down.

 

[Greenback]

Everyone has their own views on the subject but lets face it, if everyone was honest then there would never be any need for PF's, i've been an RPI for 10 years and it is amazing how low some people will stoop to avoid a fare, I know that with FGW PF's are not issued to fare evaders (maybe occasionally to the odd adult on a child ticket) fare evaders are reported for prosecution, lets also not forget that you cannot PF somebody on a restricted ticket or someone who is off route so all the horror stories about people being PF'd for being on the wrong train are a myth, most of these horror stories are usually to do with guards and not RP staff! PF's work very well when used with common sense and I will be the first to conceed that some TOC's RPI's leave a lot to be desired, we all know which ones, the same ones that end up on forums and in the media etc, it's not often that you see many stories about FGW's inspectors on these forums as the degree of training is actually quite customer focused.

That's a very fair comment about the FGW RPI's. I was surprised to see that Par was ina PF area in the Summer, as no one had reported any problems, although in fairness it hadn't been like that for long. Several months down the line, and all is still quiet!

 

[chuckles1066]

Take Bath for example, covered in PF posters, crammed with tourists in the middle of summer and the gates to the car park and the ticket barriers are left wide open

I was going to post something similar

As a newbie to rail travel, it amazes me that I can get on at Patchway and off at Bath and not have to show anyone my ticket.

The barriers at Bath are hit and miss, the last couple of days they've been open a.m and p.m......you can always tell before you get near because there isn't a massive queue on the stairs

 

[Stigy]

I think PFs are used alot by staff, when they shouldn't be. For example, if somebody has no money or no ticket, unless the circumstances are exceptional (ie; no previous and seems they have genuinely left their wallet at home), they should be reported and an MG11 submit. Same goes for people who have a string of previous PFs....why issue another one? I think some staff see it as an easy way out of writing a report. All Revenue Staff should be trained to write, even those that aren't Inspectors.

PFs are ok for first time offenders who commit a byelaw ticket offence, whereby a prosecution might be seen as a little harsh, but they are not, and never have been there for blatant fare evaders. Regarding TVMs not working properly etc, that's irrelevant if a punter wasn't aware if it not working as they ran for their train...

 

[Greenback]

I would agree that PF's are used on occasions where stricter action would be warrnated. I think this stems from it being an easy way ut for the RPI, plus easy revenue for the TOC. Many TOC's seem content to just get £20 with minimum hassle, rather than pursue regular offenders through court.

I take issue with the TVM point though! Maybe the passneger is running for the train as they have spent five minutes trying to get the TVM to work! As with the one at my station, where it is very difficult and time consuming to get certain tickets as areas of the touch screen do not seem to work!

 

[Stigy]

I take issue with the TVM point though! Maybe the passneger is running for the train as they have spent five minutes trying to get the TVM to work! As with the one at my station, where it is very difficult and time consuming to get certain tickets as areas of the touch screen do not seem to work!

I think you're missing the point I was trying to make regarding the TVMs. What I meant was that if you speak to a passenger and they make no mention that the TVM wasn't functioning correctly, and they just ran for the train, then why should the TVM issue pose a problem when issuing a PF? If on the other hand the passenger states that they were trying to use the TVM to no avail, or that the TVM wouldn't take their cash, etc etc, then fair enough. Even if you know the TVM has been out of action for a week, but the passenger didn't know this, then you could argue that they made no attempt to buy a ticket.