Ivo
Established Member
Never mind the local paper; with a headline like that it belongs in The Sun...
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Penalty Fare advice - please help!
- Thread starter jenny121
- Start date
- Status
Never mind the local paper; with a headline like that it belongs in The Sun...
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I think you are absolutely right, and this has been my point all the way through this thread!
Do they actually work? Well, I can say that they act as a deterrent to fare evasion in my local area, just from talking to people outside of work, so that's a success in my book. The weakness is that the system is too inflexible to weed out scenarios such as the OP's.
it'd be even better if she could still get the excess ticket (ie. the return period hasn't expired) so she can hold up the one she should have gotten in the picture, along with the penalty fare notice.
Actually it probably isn't a bad idea to get the excess as part of the appeal process.....
If nothing else, the industry should stop such things because all of these would make good stories in the press (if people actually went to them).
Given this forum is primarily for the railway industry, it's somewhat ironic that we're encouraging negative publicity for it. Clearly that means the industry is doing something very, very wrong.
Given this forum is primarily for the railway industry, it's somewhat ironic that we're encouraging negative publicity for it. Clearly that means the industry is doing something very, very wrong.
Is this an admission that PFs are used as an easy way out against fare evaders?
If anything, this strengthens my case!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
This gives me an idea.
I don't want to give advice that could land the OP a criminal record, but I do wonder if the fact the fare is £0.00 may make a significant difference if she refused to pay the PF.
See this thread and note the compensation...
... which is £0.00 in this case.
Questions
1) Would the courts accept a case where the compensation is £0.00?
2) Can someone be fined where there is a £0.00 loss to the company?
If the answer to these questions is "no" then the OP may be best off refusing to pay the penalty fare, and see if they take it to court.
I would love to see that. If any legal experts here feel the OP has a good case, I would happily donate to a fund toward court costs.
I would absolutely love it if the TOCs received a massive humiliation in court!
The negative publicity would be quite bad for them, and we could also use it as a platform to campaign against Penalty Fares.
Seriously, we could be on to something here.
You know as well as I do that they wouldn't let it go to to court. However, I'm sure they'd work it so that they could consider the OP has having defaulted, then go down the route of getting a court order and bailiffs for non-payment, complete with a negative entry on a credit record.
I wonder how you'd FORCE it to court?
I wonder how you'd FORCE it to court?
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
Small claims?
The TOC would never risk court action over an unpaid penalty fare due to a zero excess. The press would humiliate them.
The OP did know know her PF rights, and the TOC picked up an easy 20 quid. That's the result they're going for, taking advantage of honest people's ignorance.
Hopefully the OP can still go back and get the zero excess (do they retain the ticket on a paid PF?) and humiliate the TOC in question and stop this absurd policy.
The OP did know know her PF rights, and the TOC picked up an easy 20 quid. That's the result they're going for, taking advantage of honest people's ignorance.
Hopefully the OP can still go back and get the zero excess (do they retain the ticket on a paid PF?) and humiliate the TOC in question and stop this absurd policy.
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,554
Unfortunately, I is now impossible to get the zero excess as the ticket the OP purchased was a Off Peak Day Return - not a period return as has been misunderstood.
I think that inspectors have the right to retain the ticket as it is their evidence that the crime has been committed.
I think that inspectors have the right to retain the ticket as it is their evidence that the crime has been committed.
Ivo
Established Member
But is it a "crime" though? She paid the right fare, even if she exaggerated the journey a little, so how is it a criminal offence?
I like the new avatar by the way
I like the new avatar by the way
What crime?
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,554
Sorry - I should have said, give me a better word!
'Offence' maybe?
I like the new avatar by the way
Thanks - find me the other forum member with this as part of their posts (signature in particular!) and PM me the answer.
Hint: He/She can be found in the bus related discussions on this site!
Ivo
Established Member
What offence was committed?
Breach of contract.
An easy way out? That's an interesting interpretation! I've always considered them to be in place as a deterrent rather than anything more sinister but what do I know?!
The point being, someone out to fare evade should never be given the opportunity to pay £20 and that's it - they should have their details taken and appear in court.
So, it does beg the question; what is the point of penalty fares? What purpose do they serve, except to let criminals off easily?
I guess if the PF ever went up to £50 as it has in London (with a 50% reduction for early payment) you might see a positive result, as indeed you might if you increased it further still, which saves court time - but it still sends the wrong message.
Remember, those who are confident enough (or is that cocky?) can often get away with things anyway - just look like you're up for a fight. As long as the RPI isn't with lots of colleagues, or police officers if they're doing a major sting, they'll usually back down. Likewise, I'm sure we've all seen how RPIs will treat rather attractive young ladies very different - giving them the benefit of the doubt or a 'warning'.
Anyway, I'm now taking things off topic.
So, it does beg the question; what is the point of penalty fares? What purpose do they serve, except to let criminals off easily?
I guess if the PF ever went up to £50 as it has in London (with a 50% reduction for early payment) you might see a positive result, as indeed you might if you increased it further still, which saves court time - but it still sends the wrong message.
Remember, those who are confident enough (or is that cocky?) can often get away with things anyway - just look like you're up for a fight. As long as the RPI isn't with lots of colleagues, or police officers if they're doing a major sting, they'll usually back down. Likewise, I'm sure we've all seen how RPIs will treat rather attractive young ladies very different - giving them the benefit of the doubt or a 'warning'.
Anyway, I'm now taking things off topic.
Lampshade
Established Member
They are a deterrent - to using the railways - against passengers who have made an honest mistake. Whenever I travel with a TOC who operates a PF scheme I'm often fully geared up for a fight, even though I always have a valid ticket, just in case an overzealous RPI tries it on.
The purpose is to charge a hefty fare to genuine customers (not evaders) who do not understand the intricacies of the ticketing system, or who have had difficulty with a ticket machine etc.
The purpose is not, officially at least, to let criminals off easily. However in practice they are used to let criminals off easy and many times rail staff have effectively admitted this!
There is strong evidence that the scheme is totally and utterly flawed, misused and very often misunderstood.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Basically PFs are issued to evaders because it's easy to do. Meanwhile, up North where there is more honesty, there is a lot less evasion because people know that if they evade they will be in court.
If someone hides in the toilet of a XC train to avoid the guard they could expect to end up in court. If someone hides in the toilet of a LM train to avoid an inspector they could expect to be issued with a PF (which isn't appropriate in reality but many people think that's what PFs are for!).
It's a very easy way out and is hardly a deterrent if someone thinks that they'll only get caught occasionally and then it's £20 (or even £50).
I bet there is a lot more evasion on SWT London inner suburban services, with their guards who sit in back cabs and inspectors who are seen once in a blue moon issuing PFs to evaders, than there is on FSR Strathclyde area services, with ticket inspectors constantly checking on board and no PFs. The idea that PFs are a deterrent is flawed. Having a member of staff on board every train who does not penalise legitimate customers and ensures tickets are checked regularly is the way it should be done.
Friendly members of staff on each train are the solution. Rarely seen jobsworths like the one on FCC described by jonmorris0844 in his PF thread, issuing PFs are not the answer.
We can see that but DafT cannot. But since when have DafT had any common sense or knowledge about the real world?
Ivo
Established Member
The only time a PF ever seems to be a true deferrent is when the "twice the single fare" rule kicks in with great effect, on a route such as King's Cross to York (a fine of upwards of £150!), but by the time you reach that kind of fine the TOC would just go to court anyway.
If a PF is appropriate, then there is no basis for legal action.
York to London does not have PFs (unless you are using FCC from London to Stevenage/Peterborough!). The fare on board (EC) is £111.50
A PF is not a fine (well, we all know it is in all but name, but technically it isn't a fine)
Do LM not bother with TIRs then?!
RochdalePioneers
Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 527
Having read the top half of the thread then got bored with the same arguments made I have to ask - is the Penalty Fare applied in this case beneficial to the railway and to London Midland or detrimental? Does fining a passenger for having spent £x on a ticket when they should (a) have understood that things like a zero excess exist (b) have understood how to obtain one and (c) have done so - when the material gain to the TOC is £0 - does this do London Midland and their industry good or not.
Were this any other service provider or retail company, there would be no silly fine, or if one issued quickly retracted. In imposing a £20 fine for failing to buy a ticket valued at £0.00, what London Midland and by association the railway industry tell its passengers is "we are utter pillocks with no concept of customer service, sanity or logic".
She should pay her £20, plaster it all over the press and see LM squirm.
Were this any other service provider or retail company, there would be no silly fine, or if one issued quickly retracted. In imposing a £20 fine for failing to buy a ticket valued at £0.00, what London Midland and by association the railway industry tell its passengers is "we are utter pillocks with no concept of customer service, sanity or logic".
She should pay her £20, plaster it all over the press and see LM squirm.
Although I agree on the face of it that the penalty fare seems harsh the simple fact is that they went past their stop and even though an excess would have been zero a singel from University to Selly Oak is £1.50. So by not getting the ticket excessed (and no I did not know about 0 excesses before coming on this forum) then they are surely liable for the single fare.
Based on the arguements on here that as the fare was the same then no PF should (morally) have been issued does this mean that if I buy a return from Selly Oak to BHI and go back to Smethwick Galton Bridge (same fare) then I should be allowed to do that?
Based on the arguements on here that as the fare was the same then no PF should (morally) have been issued does this mean that if I buy a return from Selly Oak to BHI and go back to Smethwick Galton Bridge (same fare) then I should be allowed to do that?
222007
Member
You really do have a massive problem with RPI's dont you? As one of your arch enemies regardless of if said passenger is an ugly beefcake of a bloke of a pretty blonde with big boobs they get treated the same. Just because you have had a bad experience with one RPI does not mean we are all the same which reading your post's to me sounds like you tar us all with the same brush!!! As for someone looking like there up for a fight - thats fine by me BTP at the next station if they kick off doesnt bother me
No I don't have a massive problem with RPIs. In fact, I'd suggest you haven't read many of my posts, as I defend them to the hilt most of the time. What I'm saying, which cannot be denied (unless I'm the only one on the planet) is that SOME revenue staff will simply not deal with the very people I am sure the TOCs (and industry) want to deal with.
Now, I'm sure that you can accept that I haven't lied or even exaggerated as I've seen these examples MANY times and, given that I am not on every single train, we must assume that it goes on when I'm not around?? I commend you for saying you'd not care what someone looked like, and that you'd take on people who look up for a fight, but you must have different training or go beyond what the TOC expects of you? And, can you really imagine FCC (in my examples, as the TOC I use most) ever managing to get BTP to meet at the next station?? No, these members of staff are ON THEIR OWN - and often LITERALLY on their own, working on their own. Sometimes they operate as a group of two or more, and that's when I'd expect them to perhaps stand up to people more. Maybe another argument for another day; can an RPI really work properly on their own?
For the record, I've not had any bad experiences with RPIs (bar one or two, which is extremely insignificant given my many, many years of commuting) and chat with many of them regularly. They all know about my situation and all know it was totally wrong, and gives them all a bad reputation. Luckily for them, I don't suddenly consider ALL people to be bad just because of the actions of another. I judge people as I find them, and when I see RPIs letting a gang of kids off with a 'warning' because they're too scared of being attacked and all the other things I know you know happen, I feel I am perfectly entitled to comment.
If you can find any post where I've suggested getting rid of RPIs or stripping TOCs of their franchise (the sort of OTT stuff you'll find on Twitter, Facebook or any comments on a newspaper website etc) then please show me! I was a firm supporter of penalty fares until recently too, without having considered all the issues. Now, more recently, it has me thinking that PFs are actually not even doing what they're supposed to do. Not only that, but they've become an easy solution to a greater problem - letting criminals off with an easy ticket instead of a criminal record and heavy fine.
I guess this is why, to most people, PFs are good. If you asked people in the 'right' way, you'd probably get 100% support. 'Do you think people who don't buy a ticket, which costs you money in higher fares, should pay a penalty?' - that sort of thing.
Why not ask; 'Do you think that someone who regularly defrauds the railway should be taken to court, or given a flat-rate £20 charge, say no more?'
Sorry for the long post, but I am really quite keen to get over the point that I am not anti RPI!
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Just reading this and thinking about how daft it sounds, it occured to me that perhaps the RPI didn't understand about zero-fare excesses either and expected the OP to have paid the full single fare from University to Selly Oak???
EM2
Established Member
I know of a fairly well-known television personality who has been PF'd (quite correctly) by one RPI three times this year alone. I have actually witnessed this person dig £20 out of their pocket without a second thought.
It's unlikely that this RPI is the only one to have caught this person travelling without a ticket, so it's quite possible that they have been PF'd ten times or more.
So, I wonder if they take the gamble that 'I've not been caught x times, so if I get caught now, £20 will balance out when I haven't paid...', in other words, they're still in profit.
- Status