Passenger Focus

[IanXC]

I have been trying to find out how Passenger Focus actually works for complaints - what authority do they have or is it more of a mediation service?

Also how are they funded? Is it by the TOCs and if so, on what basis?

thanks

 

[wintonian]

well they are a QUANGO funded by the DfT? And akin to a choclate fire guard - unless others have a better opinion.

 

[yorkie]

They are funded by the DfT, yes.

Hence why they go against passengers wishes and support Penalty Fares and even support barriers at InterCity stations where they are totally unsuitable. Hmmm

They will support specific queries customers have but they don't seem to be particularly interested in challenging unfair terms or asserting how contradicting terms should be interpreted. Getting through to someone knowledgeable at PF is harder than getting through to someone knowledgeable in ATOC! In fact, is there anyone at PF who is very knowledgeable about the Routeing Guide? There's no evidence that there is, which is concerning given that they have a role to play when ATOC want to change the Guide.

With regard to barriers, serious questions are being asked:

http://www.railpro.co.uk/news/?idArticles=333

Rail group: Why isn’t Passenger Focus speaking out against barriers?

Katie Silvester
September 1, 2010
A rail user group is calling into question Passenger Focus’s credibility, because the watchdog has remained almost silent on the issue of ticket barriers, which are almost universally unpopular with passengers.

The Department for Transport has been pressuring train operators to put ticket gates in at stations to help stem revenue loss from ticketless travel. But the measure remains unpopular with passengers, causing long queues, cutting ‘meeters and greeters’ off from station facilities and even causing injuries.

Yet Passenger Focus has been quoted as saying barriers are a ‘necessary evil’, despite there being no obvious benefits to passengers.....

If Passenger Focus wish to be taken seriously as being independent, they need to re-consider several of their policies, they need to re-assure the public, and they need to engage with us.

 

[TEW]

In my experience Passenger Focus have been very good where a specific TOC has not dealt with my complaint adequately.

 

[185]

A senior boss from Passenger Focus is a former FirstGroup TOC managing director.

Despite the fact I despise PF as an organisation that is expensive and doesn't actually do very much, it's redeeming feature is the former managing director they recruited utterly hates FirstGroup which can only be a good thing. )

 

[alloneword100]

Err, I have to say I was very pleased when they put ticket barriers in at Waterloo. If there was a ticket inspection on the train there used to be several people in the carriage who bought one, and they had always 'got on at the last station'. You just knew that they were getting away without paying when there was no inspection, subsidised by my Gold Card. Now there are far fewer. Getting through the barriers adds maybe 30-45 seconds to the journey - I can live with that.

All I want now is an Oyster-type season ticket that works on both train and underground and I'll be a happy man...

 

[Mojo]

Err, I have to say I was very pleased when they put ticket barriers in at Waterloo. If there was a ticket inspection on the train there used to be several people in the carriage who bought one, and they had always 'got on at the last station'. You just knew that they were getting away without paying when there was no inspection, subsidised by my Gold Card. Now there are far fewer. Getting through the barriers adds maybe 30-45 seconds to the journey - I can live with that.

The problem is that ticket gates only stop the stupid people who have no intention of buying a ticket. Anyone who gives some thought to it can avoid giving a ticket barrier a valid ticket on a large gateline like the one at Waterloo.

 

[wintonian]

The problem is that ticket gates only stop the stupid people who have no intention of buying a ticket.

Isn’t that 90% of fare evaders though?

 

[Flamingo]

Digressing slightly, anyone that thinks that ticket barriers are useless should look at the ticket numbers for Grangetown in Cardiff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grangetown_railway_station)

2004/05 * 0.601 million
2005/06 * decrease 0.326 million
2006/07 * decrease 115,108
2007/08 * increase 124,937
2008/09 * increase 133,478

It's the closest station to Cardiff. What caused the drop in nearly half a million passengers a year (allegedly) using this station? The majority of stations in south Wales being barriered.

Barriers not only discourage ticketless travel, they also keep a large number of undesirables (drunks, anti-social behaviour, bag thieves) off the railway. That's from first-hand experience, you won't find many on-train staff who don't think that all stations should be barriered 24/7!

 

[Lampshade]

The hardcore fare evader would know all the tricks to get round them. Ticket gates only stop casual evaders (people who couldn't be bothered queueing) or people who have made genuine mistakes with regard to routing/peak time restrictions. In short, they stop the easy targets.

 

[Flamingo]

The hardcore fare evader would know all the tricks to get round them. Ticket gates only stop casual evaders (people who couldn't be bothered queueing) or people who have made genuine mistakes with regard to routing/peak time restrictions. In short, they stop the easy targets.

Which is good, as it prevents the unknowing making mistakes, and leaves the on-board revenue more time to concentrate on finding the hard-core, as opposed to having to stop every few seats to sell tickets to the lame and lazy.

 

[Lampshade]

Which is good, as it prevents the unknowing making mistakes, and leaves the on-board revenue more time to concentrate on finding the hard-core, as opposed to having to stop every few seats to sell tickets to the lame and lazy.

Which is all very well in the London commuter belt, 12 carriage trains and severe overcrowding. I can (grudgingly) accept ticket barriers at say, Waterloo and Guildford etc. The main issues start when Intercity stations are barriered such as Sheffield and York. TOCs have this blinkered mentality that barriers are the solution to all problems without listening to any objections, no matter how widespread they are.

Your second point about revenue selling tickets on the train - that is of course if it happens at all. A case in point, I travelled from Chapel-en-le-Frith to Manchester Piccadilly on Saturday night, I had my ticket checked immediately after boarding - which would imply the Guard's Avantix was working. There was approximately ten people on the train at this point, however, there were no further ticket checks after any of the following stations and the train was full and standing upon arrival at Piccadilly. Bearing in mind pretty much every station south of Stockport is unstaffed, I would estimate 40-50% on this train had no ticket.

Is this part of a new strategy for TOCs to overexaggerate the extent of fare evasion to justify more barriers? I really wouldn't be surprised.

 

[jd]

*Slightly* OT, perhaps, but Passenger Focus do commission mystery traveller assessments of bus services in major cities/conurbations outside London.

 

[talltim]

Digressing slightly, anyone that thinks that ticket barriers are useless should look at the ticket numbers for Grangetown in Cardiff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grangetown_railway_station)

2004/05 * 0.601 million
2005/06 * decrease 0.326 million
2006/07 * decrease 115,108
2007/08 * increase 124,937
2008/09 * increase 133,478

It's the closest station to Cardiff. What caused the drop in nearly half a million passengers a year (allegedly) using this station? The majority of stations in south Wales being barriered.

I assume they are actually the passenger numbers, not ticket numbers? Otherwise your argument is that the introduction of barriers has led to 1/2 nmllion less tickets being sold.

 

[Deerfold]

I assume they are actually the passenger numbers, not ticket numbers? Otherwise your argument is that the introduction of barriers has led to 1/2 nmllion less tickets being sold.

I think the argument is that most people with tickets there were going further but needed to get through the barriers at Cardiff - but now they need a ticket which will get them out as well - and if it's a local journey it's probably not worth them buting two short tickets.

Personally I found putting barriers in at Leeds annoying as it causes a lot of congestion on the platforms as I'm often trying to change from Platforms 1-5 to 8 - and when I'm travelling locally usually have a ticket which doesn't fit the barriers. Besides, I've lost count of the number of times I've got through the barriers without having shown a valid ticket.

 

[Flamingo]

I assume they are actually the passenger numbers, not ticket numbers? Otherwise your argument is that the introduction of barriers has led to 1/2 nmllion less tickets being sold.

It's ticket numbers, not passenger numbers. Stand at the excess fares window in Cardiff on a Friday night / Saturday morning listening to all the passengers who have come from Grangetown (approx 10 minutes walk from Cardiff station, usually quiet as the grave), it's an eyeopener. My argument is that we now have half a million passengers buying the correct ticket for their journey, not the cheapest ticket to get them through the barriers.

One particular faredodger used to go to Port Talbot (the only unbarriered station left) every morning clutching his Grangetown ticket, and give some BS story when asked. After I had him a few times I flagged him up to BTP, I haven't seen him for a while

Sorry, none of the arguments that have been advanced about Intercity being special etc. stand up to any scrutiny. Without ticket barriers, we may as well have an honesty box on the outside of the train and not bother about much else, IMHO.

 

[Mojo]

Sorry, none of the arguments that have been advanced about Intercity being special etc. stand up to any scrutiny.

I agree with this quote only, purely because IC trains make so many stops now on leaving the major cities with stops within 10/15 mins:

• Bristol TM - Bath - Chippenham
• Bristol TM - Bristol Parkway
• Wolverhampton - Sandwell/Dudley - Birmingham NS - Birmingham Int - Coventry
• Leeds - Wakefield Westgate
• Edinburgh - Haymarket
• Glasgow - Motherwell

It would be very hard to carry out an on-train check on this bit and would also be slightly pointless if you could, as the long sections of journey (eg. those to London or those actual IC trips) would be unchecked, loosing much more money.

 

[IanXC]

Thanks for all your replies, I started the thread to see what the current situation is and how it works out. Some of you might have seen my post about a mistake with an off peak ticket, the complaint process has been rather illuminating shall we say. No real attempts to answer specific points and the general feeling of being fobbed off. Its also interesting to see that Passenger Focus is funded by DfT.

I work in the financial services industry and deal with complaints fairly regularly for my firm. In a similar fashion to PF our Financial Ombudsman Service requires that you give the company the opportunity to reply to your concerns and then you have the option to dispute this by going to the FOS. However FOS is purely funded by each complaint costing (regardless of whether FOS finds in favour or against the customer) a fee of £500 to the financial services firm concerned.

So for me dealing with complaints its clearly in our interest to avoid the £500 fee and settle the issue with the customer, whatever our outlook on the issue itself. It strikes me that introducing such a system to rail complaints would have the benefit of making TOCs more focused on their service/complaint handling but also allow DfT to make a cost saving in these difficult times. Thoughts?

 

[sheff1]

Thanks for all your replies, I started the thread to see what the current situation is and how it works out. Some of you might have seen my post about a mistake with an off peak ticket, the complaint process has been rather illuminating shall we say. No real attempts to answer specific points and the general feeling of being fobbed off. Its also interesting to see that Passenger Focus is funded by DfT.

I work in the financial services industry and deal with complaints fairly regularly for my firm. In a similar fashion to PF our Financial Ombudsman Service requires that you give the company the opportunity to reply to your concerns and then you have the option to dispute this by going to the FOS. However FOS is purely funded by each complaint costing (regardless of whether FOS finds in favour or against the customer) a fee of £500 to the financial services firm concerned.

So for me dealing with complaints its clearly in our interest to avoid the £500 fee and settle the issue with the customer, whatever our outlook on the issue itself. It strikes me that introducing such a system to rail complaints would have the benefit of making TOCs more focused on their service/complaint handling but also allow DfT to make a cost saving in these difficult times. Thoughts?

Excellent idea.

It is very annoying when you make a complaint to be fobbed of with a 'standard ' answer generated by someone who has clearly not read your letter. I long ago gave up writing detailed letters to TOCs when things went wrong. I was trying to get an explanation rather than compensation, but the replies became increasingly bland making the effort pointless. Now I just fill in the claim form and wait for the vouchers.

 

[John @ home]

for me dealing with complaints its clearly in our interest to avoid the £500 fee and settle the issue with the customer, whatever our outlook on the issue itself. It strikes me that introducing such a system to rail complaints would have the benefit of making TOCs more focused on their service/complaint handling but also allow DfT to make a cost saving in these difficult times. Thoughts?

In addition to their duties representing individual passengers with difficulties and complaints, PF have other important duties. These include establishing the views of passengers and responding on their behalf to proposals for change. Examples discussed on this forum in 2010 include a DfT consultation on a proposal to increase the minimum Penalty Fare from £20 to £50, and proposed changes to franchise lengths and to the National Routeing Guide (NRG).

My perception is that it is this part of PF's work which is under-resourced. For example, a member of this forum discovered through a Freedom of Information request that ATOC's responsibility to seek DfT permission and to consult PF before changing the NRG had fallen into disuse for over 5 years. It seems that PF had failed to notice!

My fear is that a funding system based on the number of individual cases would exacerbate this imbalance.

 

[theblackwatch]

It is very annoying when you make a complaint to be fobbed of with a 'standard ' answer generated by someone who has clearly not read your letter. I long ago gave up writing detailed letters to TOCs when things went wrong. I was trying to get an explanation rather than compensation, but the replies became increasingly bland making the effort pointless. Now I just fill in the claim form and wait for the vouchers.

I too have found this to be the case normally, but after a recent delay in a ScotRail Sleeper, I filled in the comments piece mentioning that we hadn't even been advised of the delay, let alone the reason. I was pleasantly surprised when, with my travel vouchers, the letter explained the reason for the delay. I also found that they responded to me in about 10 days - better than some which seem to take around 4 weeks!