Kings Cross frustration

[Antman]

Because they aren't - at least this one isn't:
What is complex about that?

Never said it was.

So if you've seen RPI's puzzled it must've been something else that was puzzling them.

Nope. It was a completely straightforward situation.

The GN RPI completely misunderstood the restriction and was trying to take the customer's details before other passengers (not me) told them they were wrong.

Initially they ignored them before the penny suddenly dropped and they realised the ticket was ok.

 

[AlterEgo]

Never said it was.



Nope. It was a completely straightforward situation.

The GN RPI completely misunderstood the restriction and was trying to take the customer's details before other passengers (not me) told them they were wrong.

Initially they ignored them before the penny suddenly dropped and they realised the ticket was ok.

Why would an RPI be taking details for someone travelling at the wrong time on an Off Peak ticket? Hmm!

 

[jon0844]

Why would an RPI be taking details for someone travelling at the wrong time on an Off Peak ticket? Hmm!

Same reason they used to say to people at Potters Bar that penalty fares would be given to people using a peak train with an off peak ticket.

(Yes, multiple things wrong with that statement)

A fairly senior RPI told me he'd report someone for prosecution if he believed someone was knowingly travelling with an off peak ticket on a peak train, as that would be clear fare evasion. I thought it might be rather hard to prove, and also wondered if it would even be possible to bring to court (my guess is it wouldn't be taken there, rather a cash settlement asked for).

 

[najaB]

Never said it was.

Nope. It was a completely straightforward situation.

Then I'm sorry, but I'm failing to understand the point you're making. You are blaming GN for having restrictions that they (and other TOCs) can't understand, yet at the same time you are saying that the restriction isn't complex.

It can't be both.

 

[Antman]

Why would an RPI be taking details for someone travelling at the wrong time on an Off Peak ticket? Hmm!

Because the RPI initially wanted them to pay a penalty fare, which the passenger refused to do.

So the RPI moved on to trying to take the passenger's details.

Other passengers got involved to correct the RPI, who realised their error and hastily left.

This was all taking place in the row of seats immediately behind me.

Then I'm sorry, but I'm failing to understand the point you're making. You are blaming GN for having restrictions that they (and other TOCs) can't understand, yet at the same time you are saying that the restriction isn't complex.

It can't be both.

I am not blaming anyone, just commenting on the situation.

To restate -

GN have restrictions on their tickets.

You consider these restrictions are simple.

I have no comment on their complexity or simplicity, but I would expect those who have to deal with them in the course of their duties have had sufficient training to be able to do so correctly.

From traveling on their trains, I have seen at first hand this is not the case, and some GN RPIs have difficulty with these restrictions.

I do not know why GN staff have difficulty dealing with GN restrictions.

My observation was if GN staff have problems dealing with GN restrictions (for whatever reason), I am not surprised another train company also has difficulties (for whatever reason).

Clear?

 

[Deerfold]

I am not blaming anyone, just commenting on the situation.

Looks like blaming to me.

GN are responsible for the continued existence of the evening peak restriction that is causing the issue.

Doesn't the fact rail staff, whichever company they work for, have difficulty understanding GN's restriction have something to do with GN?

And if you don't think this is blaming GN, I really don't know what point you're trying to make.

 

[ainsworth74]

Also what's this got to do with VTEC staff getting a simple restriction wrong more to the point?

 

[bb21]

None, and it has already been established that VTEC staff got a simple restriction wrong this time. Bugger all to do with Great Northern. Looks like some people need to let it go. There is a time and place for criticising the company. This is not it.

Ridiculous off-topic posts and I am therefore locking this thread.

 

[VauxhallandI]

I have received a response from Virgin.....

Thank you for your correspondence received on 17 February 2017. I’m really very sorry to hear the information provided to you by our staff member at London Kings Cross station was incorrect. Your frustration is understandable, and it’s important to determine what went wrong.

We provide our staff with mobiles and pagers in order to keep them up-to-date with the latest information. However, because there are so many different organisations involved in the running of the rail industry, the flow of information can sometimes be slower than we’d like, especially during disruption. This can sometimes mean that the information our staff receive is effectively out of date as soon as they get it and the result of this can be customers getting inaccurate information. I assure you that this isn’t intentional; all our staff work hard to provide you with the correct information and are as disappointed as you are when things go wrong. I’m genuinely sorry that this affected your journey.

Whilst no reimbursement is due it’s clear that you have had a very frustrating experience and I don’t want you to remain disappointed/inconvenienced. On this occasion I’m therefore happy to advise a cheque has been raised to cover the difference between the Off-Peak Single ticket and the Anytime Single ticket. We are unable to refund the full amount as you used the ticket to travel. Therefore the cheque is to the total amount of £3.70 and will be with you within 14 working days.

Once again thanks for taking the time to contact me, I hope your next experience with us is far better than the last.

Yours sincerely

************************************************************

Even when they send you what you want they managed to leave a bad taste in your mouth.

It wasn't a complicated issue.
There was reimbursement due.
I didn't ask for the full amount to be refunded as that would be ludicrous.

 

[Hadders]

I have received a response from Virgin.....



************************************************************

Even when they send you what you want they managed to leave a bad taste in your mouth.

It wasn't a complicated issue.
There was reimbursement due.
I didn't ask for the full amount to be refunded as that would be ludicrous.

What a terrible response from VTEC but sadly this is what seems to happen these days with the rail industry. I'd write back and ask for a proper response from a senior manager.

 

[AlterEgo]

Woeful and irrelevant response by VTEC, who seem to have used a pre-written paragraph which refers to information in disruption, not the staff incompetence in being unable to sell a simple ticket.

The booking office holding a revolver to its head again.

 

[sheff1]

"This can sometimes mean that the information our staff receive is effectively out of date as soon as they get it and the result of this can be customers getting inaccurate information".

What tosh. The validity of these tickets does not change at frequent intervals.

Exactly the sort of reply I would expect from Virgin though.

 

[miami]

Fraud by false representation (Section 2)
The defendant: the employer of the member of staff, or the member of staff, I'm not bothered which

made a false representation correct - they said an offpeak ticket was not valid on a train when it was
dishonestly
knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading correct - they do this constantly across the industry. The ticket has the conditions written on it, via way of a URL, the staff member ignored these conditions
with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss. correct - they want to sell peak time tickets
The offence is entirely focused on the conduct of the defendant.

So the question is "are they doing it dishonestly". To quote: "The question of dishonesty' is one for the jury and submissions of no case to answer should not be acceded to based only on the issue of dishonesty."