Northern's approach to ticketless travel

[Merseysider]

A FOI request to BTP shows that Northern told a porkie, as BTP were not consulted regarding Northern's little scheme.

Furthermore, their assertion that "if they receive a further warning they will receive an £80 fixed penalty" has also been proven to be untrue by the volume of threads in Disputes & Prosecutions where the £80 is handed out for first-time events.

Only once in the last year have I seen a guard handing out "Failure to Purchase" forms.

Additionally, the £80 fixed penalty is not offered as such, the passenger has to offer it as an 'admin fee' or similar in order to avoid being prosecuted.

Does anyone reading this have a copy of an £80 Fixed Penalty Notice they would be willing to upload (minus any personal details)?

Their Passengers' Charter states "Where there is evidence of an intention to avoid payment we will seek criminal prosecution."

However we also know this is not the case.

Their website makes mention of a £30 admin fee for first time offenders, yet never have I seen an admin fee of £30 be 'charged' by Northern; it is always £80.

Their policy on ticketless travel is a mess. Should there be a level of consistency?

 

[northwichcat]

That's nothing new. Northern told TfGM the scheme would be a £80 penalty for second time offenders and would only apply on lines where posters advertise the scheme at every station.

 

[bb21]

I thought we had been through this before.

Yes, this alleged "system" is in a bit of a mess at the moment. The morality and legality of it is questionable to say the least, and they don't really do what they claimed they would do.

However the most important thing is that this is used as a standardised procedure to secure an out-of-court settlement, and nobody is forced to accept it. Everyone is free to contest the matter of their contravention of the railway regulations in court.

The root cause of this is the huge imbalance in the power between passengers and the rail companies. reflected through the implementation of various railway regulations. This is really a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Merseysider]

That's nothing new. Northern told TfGM the scheme would be a £80 penalty for second time offenders and would only apply on lines where posters advertise the scheme at every station.

Another example of Northern's cock and bull story. I've seen plenty of posters warning people that it's illegal to ride without paying first, but nothing regarding the £80.

I was pretty sure TfGM only agreed to the £80 scheme on the condition it wasn't handed out for first-time occurrences.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Serco tellies porkie pies to maximise income in a morally dubious way?

That's unusual.

But I don't want to just bash Serco and Abellio, much as they deserve it. I think having such a ridiculous policy does them no favours when it comes to goodwill and brand reputation. If an honest and innocent mistake costs £80 then, chances are, that customer is either a) lost to the service or b) more likely to misbehave in future to "get their money's worth". Although judging by their treatment of passengers in Yorkshire and Lancashire over the last year, I'm guessing they don't give two hoots about brand reputation...

 

[Merseysider]

I thought we had been through this before.

Yes, this alleged "system" is in a bit of a mess at the moment. The morality and legality of it is questionable to say the least, and they don't really do what they claimed they would do.

However the most important thing is that this is used as a standardised procedure to secure an out-of-court settlement, and nobody is forced to accept it. Everyone is free to contest the matter of their contravention of the railway regulations in court.

The root cause of this is the huge imbalance in the power between passengers and the rail companies. reflected through the implementation of various railway regulations. This is really a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to stir up a load of anti-Northern Rail sentiment, nor am I trying to argue that it shouldn't be offered.

But do you think it's the best way to approach ticketless travel? Instead of having different penalties for different degrees of seriousness, everyone gets hit with £80.

I'm more than open to suggestions on how the fairness of being given a chance to change one's behaviour before being prosecuted can be balanced with an attempt to make ticketless travel as unattractive as possible, but is bribery really the best way to go about this?

 

[bb21]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to stir up a load of anti-Northern Rail sentiment, nor am I trying to argue that it shouldn't be offered.

But do you think it's the best way to approach ticketless travel? Instead of having different penalties for different degrees of seriousness, everyone gets hit with £80.

I'm more than open to suggestions on how the fairness of being given a chance to change one's behaviour before being prosecuted can be balanced with an attempt to make ticketless travel as unattractive as possible, but is bribery really the best way to go about this?

Not at all.

No, I don't think it is the best way to deal with the ticketless phenomenon, as don't think a one-size-fits-all measure would ever be completely fair.

Nevertheless I think the original proposal has some cred about it. I like the idea that everyone is given an opportunity to improve before the punishments are dished out, as this phenomenon is as much BR's own fault as the passenger's, but this has been poorly implemented due to vested interests and a number of other things.

To have a fair and consistent approach it is necessary to invest in proper ticket purchasing facilities, an effective queue monitoring system, a fair revenue protection policy with competently trained staff and an impartial appeals system. Until the day IPFAS and RPSS are truly independent I don't think this is ever going to happen, as status quo benefits the train companies far more as it stands than it would otherwise be.

Does the government care? Not a jot, and here lies your biggest problem.

 

[Clip]

Serco tellies porkie pies to maximise income in a morally dubious way?

That's unusual.

But I don't want to just bash Serco and Abellio, much as they deserve it. I think having such a ridiculous policy does them no favours when it comes to goodwill and brand reputation. If an honest and innocent mistake costs £80 then, chances are, that customer is either a) lost to the service or b) more likely to misbehave in future to "get their money's worth". Although judging by their treatment of passengers in Yorkshire and Lancashire over the last year, I'm guessing they don't give two hoots about brand reputation...

Wow yet again pulling out the fraud probe to show your hatred towards Serco never gets old - no matter how many times you do it.


@JakeF - £80 IS the Penalty Fare amount in London(yes its reduced if paid promptly) so why should it be any different elsewhere - especially in a place that seems to have such high volumes of fare evasion? Its applied in a clunky way Ill admit but £80 is a good deterrent wouldnt you say?

 

[Merseysider]

@JakeF - £80 IS the Penalty Fare amount in London(yes its reduced if paid promptly) so why should it be any different elsewhere - especially in a place that seems to have such high volumes of fare evasion? Its applied in a clunky way Ill admit but £80 is a good deterrent wouldnt you say?

The £80 is a good deterrent. And part of the reason for that is the fact everyone knows if you're caught it'll be £80. No ifs no buts.

Northern send out mixed signals though. For example, some guards are quite happy to let customers pay on board by card, even though the card-only TVM was in full working order. One or two guards will even sell off-peak tickets instead of correctly charging the Anytime fare.

What kind of impression does this give out? "If you don't pay before boarding, the worst that can happen is we'll make you pay onboard".

If Northern introduced the level and consistency of enforcement TfL oversee, no-one could complain.

Not at all.

No, I don't think it is the best way to deal with the ticketless phenomenon, as don't think a one-size-fits-all measure would ever be completely fair.

Nevertheless I think the original proposal has some cred about it. I like the idea that everyone is given an opportunity to improve before the punishments are dished out, as this phenomenon is as much BR's own fault as the passenger's, but this has been poorly implemented due to vested interests and a number of other things.

To have a fair and consistent approach it is necessary to invest in proper ticket purchasing facilities, an effective queue monitoring system, a fair revenue protection policy with competently trained staff and an impartial appeals system. Until the day IPFAS and RPSS are truly independent I don't think this is ever going to happen, as status quo benefits the train companies far more as it stands than it would otherwise be.

Does the government care? Not a jot, and here lies your biggest problem.

I wasn't around in BR days, could you fill me in on what you meant by what I've emboldened?

I also struggle to understand how IPFAS and RPSS can legally describe themselves as independent when they're anything but.

Merseytravel's PF scheme works perfectly because you can't get on a train without walking past an opportunity to pay. There was clear publicity before the PF system was introduced and after it was, everyone got one chance in a 'transitional' period, being warned to buy before boarding.

Northern provide half as many facilities, half as many revenue staff trained half as well, yet charge 4 times as much (unofficially) as Merseytravel will for an official PF. No problems with the amount being £80, my problem is with the unscrupulous nature of it.

 

[northwichcat]

even though the card-only TVM was in full working order.

The Northern TVMs are known to freeze and crash quite frequently even when they display the green light to indicate that they are working and that's not to mention the touch screen calibration being out on them. It took me 3 attempts to get TOD printed at one the other day and I'm used to using them.

 

[Tetchytyke]

£80 IS the Penalty Fare amount in London(yes its reduced if paid promptly) so why should it be any different elsewhere - especially in a place that seems to have such high volumes of fare evasion? Its applied in a clunky way Ill admit but £80 is a good deterrent wouldnt you say?

£80 is the Penalty Fare on TfL-sponsored services, i.e. Overground and the tube. It's £20 on London TOC services. And really it's only £40 on TfL, because you get the 50% discount for prompt payment.

The difference between TfL, where every station has a variety of ticket machines and payment types, and Northern Rail is stark.

If Northern Rail started offering TfL-levels of opportunity to buy before boarding then I would have no complaint. If Northern Rail started complying with the Penalty Fares rules on ticket office queues I'd have no complaint. And if Northern started offering TfL-levels of complaints resolution and an independent appeals service then, again, I would have no complaint.

The fact that Northern Rail took over a franchise which had the proper Penalty Fares scheme in place and chose to abolish it says everything you need to know about this "fixed penalty notice" scheme. If Northern Rail were interested in the deterrent they'd never have scrapped the Penalty Fares scheme.

They're not interested in the "deterrent", they're interested in fleecing passengers, as any number of recent Passenger Focus complaints will tell you.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When did Northern have any PF scheme in place before?

 

[northwichcat]

The fact that Northern Rail took over a franchise which had the proper Penalty Fares scheme in place and chose to abolish it says everything you need to know about this "fixed penalty notice" scheme. If Northern Rail were interested in the deterrent they'd never have scrapped the Penalty Fares scheme.

Which franchise? Neither First North Western or Arriva Trains Northern had one. Northern haven't taken over any Merseyrail, LM, ATW or EMT services (who are operators who have introduced penalty fare schemes themselves.)

 

[Clip]

£80 is the Penalty Fare on TfL-sponsored services, i.e. Overground and the tube. It's £20 on London TOC services. And really it's only £40 on TfL, because you get the 50% discount for prompt payment.

The difference between TfL, where every station has a variety of ticket machines and payment types, and Northern Rail is stark.

If Northern Rail started offering TfL-levels of opportunity to buy before boarding then I would have no complaint. If Northern Rail started complying with the Penalty Fares rules on ticket office queues I'd have no complaint. And if Northern started offering TfL-levels of complaints resolution and an independent appeals service then, again, I would have no complaint.

The fact that Northern Rail took over a franchise which had the proper Penalty Fares scheme in place and chose to abolish it says everything you need to know about this "fixed penalty notice" scheme. If Northern Rail were interested in the deterrent they'd never have scrapped the Penalty Fares scheme.

They're not interested in the "deterrent", they're interested in fleecing passengers, as any number of recent Passenger Focus complaints will tell you.

Thats your view and one I dont share at all but thats fine, lets have everyone travel for free and that way everyone will be happy and clappy because they dont have to pay their train fares to the big bad nasty corporations anymore.


However, in the real world things are slightly different and you are welcome to join anytime you so wish but you would be more welcome if you took that massive chip off your shoulder because its weighing you down.

 

[Wolfie]

Thats your view and one I dont share at all but thats fine, lets have everyone travel for free and that way everyone will be happy and clappy because they dont have to pay their train fares to the big bad nasty corporations anymore.


However, in the real world things are slightly different and you are welcome to join anytime you so wish but you would be more welcome if you took that massive chip off your shoulder because its weighing you down.

I have to say that my view is that Northern (ie SERCO and Abellio) are a bunch of morally dubious shysters and I sincerely hope someone does challenge their bull$hit in court. I would like nothing more than them to have to pay EVERY one of their "dubious" (ok mods!) charges back (with interest!).

In fact, if the comments posted earlier about how this scheme was introduced are accurate, methinks the Secretary of State for Transport should get innundated with MPs letters.... see how long it lasts then!

 

[LateThanNever]

I have to say that my view is that Northern (ie SERCO and Abellio) are a bunch of morally dubious shysters and I sincerely hope someone does challenge their bull$hit in court. I would like nothing more than them to have to pay EVERY one of their con charges back (with interest!).

In fact, if the comments posted earlier about how this scheme was introduced are accurate, methinks the Secretary of State for Transport should get innundated with MPs letters.... see how long it lasts then!

Agree wholeheartedly. How on earth anything that Serco runs or even part runs has not been taken off them I fail to understand. The politicians are either useless, blind or frightened. Or probably all three. Have to say have written to the MP but no reply for two months so this is a good opportunity for a supplementary to hurry him up...

 

[Clip]

I have to say that my view is that Northern (ie SERCO and Abellio) are a bunch of morally dubious shysters and I sincerely hope someone does challenge their bull$hit in court. I would like nothing more than them to have to pay EVERY one of their con charges back (with interest!).

In fact, if the comments posted earlier about how this scheme was introduced are accurate, methinks the Secretary of State for Transport should get innundated with MPs letters.... see how long it lasts then!

And as I pointed out to you in another thread - they couldnt challenge one of these in court because,just like a PF, they could recind it and THEN see the person in court on a prosecution charge with no chance of an out of court settlement and a much higher fine imposed by the court and in some cases a chance of a criminal conviction that could lead to the poor little mites not being able to get their favoured job as a doctors lawyer.

I guess with all this animosity towards these penalty charges could well see Northern in its new guise set up a penalty fare scheme with such a high charge on it.

Maybe that would make you all happier??

 

[Bletchleyite]

I guess with all this animosity towards these penalty charges could well see Northern in its new guise set up a penalty fare scheme with such a high charge on it.

I think it could certainly be argued that if Northern are operating a penalty fares scheme it should really become a Penalty Fares Scheme in the eyes of the law, IYSWIM, and not some sort of workaround.

Neil

 

[Wolfie]

And as I pointed out to you in another thread - they couldnt challenge one of these in court because,just like a PF, they could recind it and THEN see the person in court on a prosecution charge with no chance of an out of court settlement and a much higher fine imposed by the court and in some cases a chance of a criminal conviction that could lead to the poor little mites not being able to get their favoured job as a doctors lawyer.

I guess with all this animosity towards these penalty charges could well see Northern in its new guise set up a penalty fare scheme with such a high charge on it.

Maybe that would make you all happier??

I have no problem with them running a proper penalty fare scheme... and ticket offices and tvms... because of course otherwise NRCOC will screw them repeatedly....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
To be absolutely clear by the way, I hate fare dodgers with a passion - why should I pay and they, literally, get a free ride - but don't believe TOCs should be able to write their own rules either....

 

[Solent&Wessex]

When did Northern have any PF scheme in place before?

Which franchise? Neither First North Western or Arriva Trains Northern had one. Northern haven't taken over any Merseyrail, LM, ATW or EMT services (who are operators who have introduced penalty fare schemes themselves.)

There was a Penalty Fares scheme on the Skipton and Ilkley lines with Arriva Trains Northern. It didn't last very long as a) they never bothered to employ enough Revenue staff who could actually charge the penalty fare; b) most stations were unstaffed as some of the newer ticket offices hadn't opened; c) the pemit to travel machines never worked as they kept getting vandalised or being stolen.

 

[Starmill]

I didn't realise ATW had a Penalty Fare scheme!

 

[bb21]

I wasn't around in BR days, could you fill me in on what you meant by what I've emboldened?

The "Pay Trains" concept had a lot to answer for.

 

[Tibbs]

And as I pointed out to you in another thread - they couldnt challenge one of these in court because,just like a PF, they could recind it and THEN see the person in court on a prosecution charge with no chance of an out of court settlement and a much higher fine imposed by the court and in some cases a chance of a criminal conviction that could lead to the poor little mites not being able to get their favoured job as a doctors lawyer.

/snip

You wait 6 months after the event so they can't charge you with a criminal offence, then you go to small claims and claim it back.

You have 6 years to claim money back via small claims.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The "Pay Trains" concept had a lot to answer for.

The Pay Train concept had its uses in the days when you had large numbers of tickets to sell, and it wasn't viable time-wise to look them all up in the fares manual (IT wasn't up to providing a device containing all the fares back then). There's little room for it now, but now a smartphone or similar device can easily contain the entire fare set.

Neil

 

[Merseysider]

You wait 6 months after the event so they can't charge you with a criminal offence, then you go to small claims and claim it back.

You have 6 years to claim money back via small claims.

People have been charged with murder years after the event, or been done for thefts they did last year when they get caught and connected to more. What is the distinction that would prevent being prosecuted for a breach of railway law?

 

[Tetchytyke]

When did Northern have any PF scheme in place before?

The Airedale and Wharfedale lines out of Leeds were a Penalty Fare area, introduced by Northern Spirit.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

lets have everyone travel for free and that way everyone will be happy and clappy because they dont have to pay their train fares to the big bad nasty corporations anymore.

I don't believe I've ever said anyone should travel for free.

I said that the charges should be fair, transparent and honest, and only applied where people have a genuine and reasonable opportunity to buy before boarding.

You compared Northern's charge of £80 with TfL's charge of £40 (with a £40 additional charge if you don't cough up quickly enough). I said that I'd have no issue with Northern charging TfL-style fines if they provided a TfL-style level of service at the ticket office.

Most stations in the Northern area do not have full-time staffed ticket offices, and the ticket offices that do exist usually only have one window. There is sometimes a TVM, but not always, and this sometimes take cash, but not always. This follows on from thirty years of "pay trains" in Lancashire and Yorkshire, where people have been told they can buy on board and have been encouraged to do so.

If Northern want a Penalty Fares scheme that's fine and good. I have no problems. But they can start by agreeing to the Penalty Fare scheme rules on ticket office queues and ticket sales provision. But that costs money, so of course Serco and Abellio choose to manipulate the badly-drafted Byelaws for profit.

 

[Oswyntail]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if there were to be a standard scheme implemented across all TOCs with the same levels of charge, publicised nationally so that everyone knew and there was no confusion.

 

[Puffing Devil]

People have been charged with murder years after the event, or been done for thefts they did last year when they get caught and connected to more. What is the distinction that would prevent being prosecuted for a breach of railway law?

Section 127 of the Magistrate's Court Act 1980

This sets the time limit of 6 months for Summary Offences - ie. those which may be tried in a Magistrate's court. Railway matters fall into this group of offences.

More serious matters may be "either way" - they can go to both Mags or Crown, depending on the magnitude of the offence. Theft is a good example - nick a bottle of wine from Tesco and you're in the Mags. Steal the Crown Jewels and you're in the Crown Court.

Rape, Murder, etc all go straight to the Crown, via a single appearance at the Mags to formally commit, or send, for trial. There is no time limit for these offences.

 

[Merseysider]

Thanks Puffing Devil

Wouldn't it be wonderful if there were to be a standard scheme implemented across all TOCs with the same levels of charge, publicised nationally so that everyone knew and there was no confusion.

I agree. Something along the lines of being charged twice the normal SDS/SDR to the next stop, or £40, whichever is greater, and being kicked off and/or prosecuted for non-compliance.

Means to implement this vary wildly between TOCs though which is part of the problem.

 

[LateThanNever]

You wait 6 months after the event so they can't charge you with a criminal offence, then you go to small claims and claim it back.

You have 6 years to claim money back via small claims.

What a fine idea! Indeed you could probably do it now, claiming you were misled or pressurised into a payment that you have since realised was erroneous. Perhaps if the 'Club of Victims of Serco/Northern' or whatever did it as a matter of course, they would deluge the admin to such an extent that they'd be so busy trying to defend their bogus charges they would hopefully have little time to issue any more! And once one had to be repaid the house of cards would begin to collapse...