one stop, no ticket

[455driver]

You are trying to compare a strict liability (railway) offence with a bit of wrong info on a (DVLA) form.

I am saying try comparing a strict liability (railway) offence with a strict liability road offence (the untaxed car) and see what happens if you dont pay!

 

[moonface123]

Your terminology. Some of it is people who want to be patted on the head and told it's all OK, that they can pay when the nasty man comes around or if they have to get past that nasty barrier.

I'm sick to the bloody back teeth of it.




I hardly blame TMs when those who don't pay their fare will react with self-righteous indignation when challenged (and get backed-up by the likes of you).



I hardly blame TMs when those who don't pay their fare will react with self-righteous indignation when challenged (and get backed-up by the likes of you).

Hello,
Just a note to this. I have been living in the UK for over 7 years now. Until I came to this forum, I had no idea that buying a ticket on board is an offence. Nobody ever told me (on the train, etc.) that I need to buy my ticket at the station. I used to go to London with groups of 50-60 people at the time and I bought the tickets from the conductor on the train. Many times, discounted tickets... They never said a single word about it. I was actually told once on the train that if you find the conductor first thing when you get one the train, it is ok to buy on board. Once you sat down, you admitted that you don't need a ticket (or something like that)...

I am not trying to make excuses here. That is not my point. This is just my experience above. I think, it is not 100% clear that buying tickets on board is naughty if ticket facilities are available.

I think, whatever the boards say - as long as the conductor doesn't make a point of saying that it is not right to buy tickets on board, many people can get under the wrong impression... Just my 2c here...

 

[CC 72100]

Hello,
Just a note to this. I have been living in the UK for over 7 years now. Until I came to this forum, I had no idea that buying a ticket on board is an offence. Nobody ever told me (on the train, etc.) that I need to buy my ticket at the station. I used to go to London with groups of 50-60 people at the time and I bought the tickets from the conductor on the train. Many times, discounted tickets... They never said a single word about it. I was actually told once on the train that if you find the conductor first thing when you get one the train, it is ok to buy on board. Once you sat down, you admitted that you don't need a ticket (or something like that)...

I am not trying to make excuses here. That is not my point. This is just my experience above. I think, it is not 100% clear that buying tickets on board is naughty if ticket facilities are available.

I think, whatever the boards say - as long as the conductor doesn't make a point of saying that it is not right to buy tickets on board, many people can get under the wrong impression... Just my 2c here...

I don't normally stray into this section for of the forum as I simply have very little knowledge on it, but I can understand where you are coming from. It is very easy - in several situations in life - to want to believe what the human says as opposed to a poster/machine. When the human (The TMs who happily sell tickets) go against the poster, then humans perhaps see that as setting a precedent, as 'people' are more likely to be right, and hey, they were on that occasion.

I'm not encouraging fair evasion - far from it - but I cannot help feeling that the failure to fully carry out this practice has led a fair few people into a false sense of security, who are now getting a shock when the behaviour they thought was perfectly fine, as it had been on so many occasions before as the actions of Rail staff seemed to go against posters, turns out to be not permitted. It's very difficult for all to have a rule, not stick to it, and then suddenly decide that they're actually going to start prosecuting people/acting upon it etc.

As I've said - I'm not trying to provide easy excuses, and yes people's behaviour (buying on board) should not be permitted in some cases, but if they've never known any different as no-one's batted an eyelid before, how are they to know? I can't help but having some sympathy with people in these cases, it is not always as clear cut as it may first appear.

 

[DarloRich]

I had a letter from the DVLA demanding £50plus or prosecution for allegedly not filling a form in correctly, I binned the letter and suprise suprise I wasn't prosecuted.

Its your decision but if you feel you were in the right I would offer to pay only the fare, assuming you didn't pay on the day?

People should not be scared of going to court (it often doesn't get that far anyway) as they will be given a fair hearing and any burden of proof always lays with the prosecution.

very poor advice on a Railway byelaw strict liability offence. The TOC simply has to prove 2 things:

1) you were on the train
2) you didnt present a valid ticket when challenged

I am quite happy to call companies bluff but only when you can defend the potential action. So far no one has ever called my bluff and issued procedings in return (yet!)

Here there really is no defence - you have to know which battles you can win. This one you cant!

 

[jb]

I don't normally stray into this section for of the forum as I simply have very little knowledge on it, but I can understand where you are coming from. It is very easy - in several situations in life - to want to believe what the human says as opposed to a poster/machine. When the human (The TMs who happily sell tickets) go against the poster, then humans perhaps see that as setting a precedent, as 'people' are more likely to be right, and hey, they were on that occasion.

Particularly if the human says what you want to hear If it's the poster that says what you want to hear and the human not, then the latter is a jobsworth.

 

[CC 72100]

Particularly if the human says what you want to hear If it's the poster that says what you want to hear and the human not, then the latter is a jobsworth.

Exactly, and it's always very difficult to tell. But who would you trust for being right - human or poster? Personally I'd go for human every time, and if a human has allowed you to do so once without explaining that it's an exception, how are you to know that the poster isn't out of date etc?

It's easy for use regular travelers to know where we stand but if you use the service once in a while, how are you to know that it's a one-off? It's a bit unfair to disregard your own policy over a period of time and then change tack and clamp down hard overnight.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If it's the poster that says what you want to hear and the human not, then the latter is a jobsworth.

Normally I'd fully agree with this, but I'd be quite surprised if people asked a TM who told them 'don't board, go and buy a ticket', only to moan when they received a PF.

 

[jb]

It's easy for use regular travelers to know where we stand but if you use the service once in a while, how are you to know that it's a one-off? It's a bit unfair to disregard your own policy over a period of time and then change tack and clamp down hard overnight.

I don't actually disagree with the broad sentiment, but a quick, admittedly somewhat unscientific, bit of "research" suggests you may be attacking a strawman to some degree here.

I searched the first 10 pages or so of D&P and could not find a single case that could be badged simply as the TOC clamping down hard on the unsuspecting passenger. In many cases there was a confounding (or aggravating) factor from the passenger side (left or made to leave destination station without paying, gave wrong origin, "panicked" etc.) and in some others there was a suggestion there may have been a mistake (e.g. TVMs not working). But I couldn't find a single case where the only factor on the passenger side was "I didn't know the rules (have changed)" and the TOC basically said "tough".

Now of course I'm not saying such cases don't exist, and nor am I saying that TOC practice is perfect, but it would seem this scenario just isn't as common as one might think.

 

[Tibbs]

I don't actually disagree with the broad sentiment, but a quick, admittedly somewhat unscientific, bit of "research" suggests you may be attacking a strawman to some degree here.

I searched the first 10 pages or so of D&P and could not find a single case that could be badged simply as the TOC clamping down hard on the unsuspecting passenger. In many cases there was a confounding (or aggravating) factor from the passenger side (left or made to leave destination station without paying, gave wrong origin, "panicked" etc.) and in some others there was a suggestion there may have been a mistake (e.g. TVMs not working). But I couldn't find a single case where the only factor on the passenger side was "I didn't know the rules (have changed)" and the TOC basically said "tough".

Now of course I'm not saying such cases don't exist, and nor am I saying that TOC practice is perfect, but it would seem this scenario just isn't as common as one might think.

With my statistian's hat on, there are nowhere near enough data points (i.e. threads) on here to make any conclusions about the total population of people caught with no tickets.

 

[island]

With my statistian's hat on, there are nowhere near enough data points (i.e. threads) on here to make any conclusions about the total population of people caught with no tickets.

That depends on your confidence level.

 

[jb]

That depends on your confidence level.

More on the precise question you want answered. I could frame a perfectly reasonable question for which the data set in question could provide an utterly compelling answer, but whatever...

 

[Flamingo]

With my statistian's hat on, there are nowhere near enough data points (i.e. threads) on here to make any conclusions about the total population of people caught with no tickets.

First write your conclusion, then find a data set to match...

 

[Parham Wood]

I don't actually disagree with the broad sentiment, but a quick, admittedly somewhat unscientific, bit of "research" suggests you may be attacking a strawman to some degree here.

I searched the first 10 pages or so of D&P and could not find a single case that could be badged simply as the TOC clamping down hard on the unsuspecting passenger. In many cases there was a confounding (or aggravating) factor from the passenger side (left or made to leave destination station without paying, gave wrong origin, "panicked" etc.) and in some others there was a suggestion there may have been a mistake (e.g. TVMs not working). But I couldn't find a single case where the only factor on the passenger side was "I didn't know the rules (have changed)" and the TOC basically said "tough".

Now of course I'm not saying such cases don't exist, and nor am I saying that TOC practice is perfect, but it would seem this scenario just isn't as common as one might think.

Not long ago a friend's daughter (22) boarded a train without a ticket due to being late and the ticket office queue length. She fully intended and did buy on board with a PF I think. She was totally unaware that she should not have done this. (I emailed her and explained why to avoid I hope future instances that would lead to prosecution). She was unaware that on other lines this could have led to a prosecution. Infrequent travellers equate trains to buses where you can buy on board i.e. there will be a person with a ticket machine and they do not equate trains to planes where you cannot buy on board but in reality is a closer comparison but try getting on board a plane without a ticket and passport. OK you can say she should have known the rules but since we tend to learn rules from parents and she probably never travelled by train with her parents she would not have learnt in this way. Yes there are posters (often badly worded allowing passengers with no intent to avoid payment to assume their actions are still legal), many posters blend in with other station notices and advertising, many people are fixed on what they want to do i.e. catch a train not read/absorb everything that surrounds them at a station and yes I have seen notices on ticket sales web sites about this - again not always something that will register (perhaps a big screen that comes on when you click on a train time search saying you must buy a ticket would help.) Genuine law abiding citizens just do not believe they are doing anything wrong in buying on the train. Further the law makes no allowance for innocent mistakes, oversleeping ( I did it once -couldn't sleep all the way from Fort William to Kings Cross and onward from Paddington, but as soon as the brakes went on for Swindon I dozed off and woke in Kemble. ) forgetting a season ticket etc.. One is at the mercy of the TOC and there is in effect no appeal as a right (or with any chance of success) as the law is so simply worded and therefore draconian. Of course it makes prosecuting those who intend to defraud easier and I am not against prosecuting these people. Even if the TOC does not prosecute the whole process can be traumatic to a law abiding citizen. The practice of selling on board is also confusing as I have said elsewhere. On the same train it can be legal to buy from the conductor if boarding from stations with no ticket selling facilities but illegal if the boarding station has facilities. It does not give a clear message.

I am not saying many of these genuine mistake cases get to court but the threat of destroying a career exists through a conviction. I know easing of rules would be an open invitation to those who would have no hesitation to defraud but my feeling is the current situation is not fair on those who do not intend to defraud. Some will say life is not fair, others that you should know all the rules, but we are only humans and we make mistakes and forget things. After all we are supporting the railways through taxes and it is supposed to be public transport( or is it these days?). Note that I am not against penalties but they should be scalable and reasonable for the offence with due allowance for the innocent mistake. Even travelling without a pre-bought ticket (e.g. boarding at an open station) can lead to prosecution and the TOC has no legal obligation to withdraw a prosecution even if purchase information is provided. Yes a charge to cover admin costs in this case is reasonable.

Finally I believe much more in your face information should be put on trains and stations to educate the public about the ticket rules because it is obvious a lot of people are unaware of the actual potential consequences.

Please forgive the rant.

 

[Antman]

Some good points Parham. I've boarded SET without a ticket before and bought one on board without any problem at all and I've seen others do the same.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't condone fare evasion but clearly some common sense has to be used.

 

[Yew]

common sense has to be used.

I fear you are not fully acquainted with the DfT.

 

[Antman]

I fear you are not fully acquainted with the DfT.

Perhaps not but maybe South Eastern trains aren't either as a far more tolerant and sensible approach seems to exist on their trains, if there is a queue at the ticket office because of a problem with a credit card or whatever should passengers really have to miss their train and wait perhaps an hour for the next one?

 

[island]

Finally I believe much more in your face information should be put on trains and stations to educate the public about the ticket rules because it is obvious a lot of people are unaware of the actual potential consequences.

Every Southeastern train I've used has had a notice by each pair of doors stating that you must buy a ticket before boarding, and every Southeastern station I've used has a notice by each entrance stating the same, and that you may be issued a penalty fare if you do not.

I am not quite sure what people would consider sufficient?

 

[Antman]

Every Southeastern train I've used has had a notice by each pair of doors stating that you must buy a ticket before boarding, and every Southeastern station I've used has a notice by each entrance stating the same, and that you may be issued a penalty fare if you do not.

I am not quite sure what people would consider sufficient?

Although this doesn't apply at SET stations where there is no ticket office or its closed and the machine (if indeed there is one) doesn't work

 

[silencio]

The fact that there isn't one simple approach also adds to the confusion. They need to standardise the information they provide to passengers and also the actions they take. I.e. Everybody has to buy before they board, if they don't then they will be prosecuted (subject to extenuating circumstances - TVM faults etc...).

Even my case though at the moment where the TVM failed and I wasn't provided the information I feel I required (that the transaction although authorised would not be taken), I was told that I could buy on the train by an employee at the station. What if the guard on board would have disagreed with this anyway and taken my details? There was no guard, this was done at the other end.

It can't be one rule for/from one and another for/from another depending on who you speak to. "But some stations don't have ticketing facilities..." Install them then!

 

[Antman]

The fact that there isn't one simple approach also adds to the confusion. They need to standardise the information they provide to passengers and also the actions they take. I.e. Everybody has to buy before they board, if they don't then they will be prosecuted (subject to extenuating circumstances - TVM faults etc...).

Even my case though at the moment where the TVM failed and I wasn't provided the information I feel I required (that the transaction although authorised would not be taken), I was told that I could buy on the train by an employee at the station. What if the guard on board would have disagreed with this anyway and taken my details? There was no guard, this was done at the other end.

It can't be one rule for/from one and another for/from another depending on who you speak to. "But some stations don't have ticketing facilities..." Install them then!

That is it exactly, a different 'rule' depending on who you happen to ask:roll:

I can appreciate that at certain remote stations it just isn't cost effective to install ticketing facilities but it has to be accepted that people boarding at such stations may well not have a ticket. And the onus shouldn't be on the passenger to walk up and down the train trying to find the guard, the guard should be coming to them.

 

[silencio]

If it's not cost effective they need to come up with a solution that allows a passenger to have purchased a ticket before boarding. Again, in my opinion, you can't have one rule dor one and one rule for another. It sends a confusing message to passengers and doesn't treat customers fairly/the same. Something that the company I work for are big on promoting.

 

[ian959]

Maybe it is just me but what is so confusing about you must buy a ticket before boarding except where no ticket purchase facilities exist, in which case buy at the first available opportunity? There is no differing rule. Now if you are saying that staff should be better trained and be more consistent than perhaps they are then that is another thing altogether, and should be raised as a complaint with the relevant TOC.

 

[island]

Thing is, it's not that simple. What if there is only a ticket vending machine and you want to pay by RTV? What if the clerk says that the ticket you want doesn't exist when it actually does? How about if there's a permit to travel machine but your only coins are 1p and 2p (and you have enough money in notes)? What if you want a split? What if there's a gigantic queue? And so on...

 

[moonface123]

Every Southeastern train I've used has had a notice by each pair of doors stating that you must buy a ticket before boarding, and every Southeastern station I've used has a notice by each entrance stating the same, and that you may be issued a penalty fare if you do not.

I am not quite sure what people would consider sufficient?

The thing is: I think, it doesn't matter how many posters you can see on the doors as long as a human being overrules the signs (even if it is a silent overrule by not saying that it is not ok).

I mean, I personally saw the posters but as the guard on the train never had a bad word about buying tickets on the Train is an offence, I was under the impression that it is ok.

I think, the guards should seriously warn the customer every time they buy a ticket from a station where ticket issuing facilities are available. In this case, they could get thought to people more effectively... No penalty, just a warning.

I remember a time when a revenue officer with the police told me on the train that I can go and buy a ticket from the guard. Now I know it is not ok and I was very lucky at that time but people basically overrule sticky signs on the door...

 

[island]

Guards who sell tickets on a Penalty Fare train are supposed to issue a printed Penalty Fare warning to the passenger and draw their attention to that warning. If that's not happening then there may be a training need.

 

[silencio]

Surely in this digital age that we live in the TOCs should be looking to implement something a little better.

 

[island]

Would you care to suggest an example of "something a little better"?

 

[silencio]

That's not really my place, however something that seems to work reasonably well is the Oyster system. I wonder if a similar national system could be introduced.

Your move TOCs/National Rail...

 

[moonface123]

That's not really my place, however something that seems to work reasonably well is the Oyster system. I wonder if a similar national system could be introduced.

Your move TOCs/National Rail...

That would cost a fortune. At the end of the day, the current system works fine (on the whole, I guess). I think the only issue that we can raise is uncosistnecy in terms of signs and actual measures taken by the guards (if paid on train for the fares).

 

[silencio]

It was a suggestion/example, I didn't say it was necessarily what they should run with. If the TOCs are the ones losing money maybe they shoukd be coming up with some other reasonable ideas.

Paper tickets, the way they are, are clearly not working though. This is shown by the need for this sub-forum.

 

[moonface123]

Guards who sell tickets on a Penalty Fare train are supposed to issue a printed Penalty Fare warning to the passenger and draw their attention to that warning. If that's not happening then there may be a training need.

I bought my tickets on the train many times, I witnessed many people purchasing tickets there as well. I have never seen any guards issuing a penalty fare warning.

I think it would save a lot (no printed papers needed, no trees killed) if the guard verbally warns the passenger that it is not ok and it is a byelaws offence.
Of course, it wouldn't make everyone buy the tickets at the station but this would be the first step to reduce the number of tickets sold on the train (for no valid reason) by 20%. (Well, I don't know the statistics but to me, 20% seems to be a good number )

The training can be done on a local level by just simply telling the guards that this procedure must be introduced.

I think, it just never really been emphasised that the conductors need to do it (just guessing here... by looking at it, it doesn't seem to be a practice)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It was a suggestion/example, I didn't say it was necessarily what they should run with. If the TOCs are the ones losing money maybe they shoukd be coming up with some other reasonable ideas.

Paper tickets, the way they are, are clearly not working though. This is shown by the need for this sub-forum.

I think paper tickets work fine 99% of the time. For the 1%, we can't expect the TOCs to change the whole system.

I don't know the right answer here either to be honest... It is just an awful lot of money to change the whole system nationwide.