I used to carry my cheque guarantee card, but for its other use with ATMs. Cheque books are bulky things. I only carried mine when I expected to use it.
-
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 increase to £100
- Thread starter ComUtoR
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
ChrisDY10
Member
Still on the West Midlands Trains site. I wonder if people like Age Concern or Learning Disabled Charities are aware? Smacks of illegal discrimination under the Equalities Act to me...
What if the station has no ticket office?
If you arrive at a station that has no ticket office, or Ticket Vending Machines available, you must, purchase a ticket on our website or via our free mobile app, before the commencement of your journey.
Western Sunset
Established Member
Their information is surely incorrect on this.
As I mentioned above, all TOCs need to be consistent in their approach. No wonder passengers are confused and maybe even afraid to go by train when presented with info like this.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 13,195
Not sure if this has been alluded to in previous posts, but the train manager on my EMR Intercity, before departing Sheffield, made a very clear announcement about the requirement for a valid ticket before boarding, and the increased penalty fare. Obviously that messages concerns only EMR services into St Pancras; I can understand why, with false information like that presented by WMR, there would be confusion for passengers when considering routes such as the Hope Valley.
I don't think they can reasonably interpret section 6.1 of the conditions of travel to justify their position.
This section makes it clear that you can buy on board if there is no means of purchase at the station, and goes on to say that this is the case if there isn't an open ticket office or ticket machine that takes the passenger's only method of payment (or preferred method depending on which bit you read).
So I don't think they can claim that every station now has a means of payment because someone can use their phone to purchase on-line. Even if their app is free (how generous of them!)
I have asked them to explain. No doubt I will get a response that completely fails to answer the question.
And of course you may very well find that you use their app and still don't have any tickets, just a code to collect them from the ticket machine.
Yes that might be a touch inconvenient. They don't seem to have thought about that either.
thedbdiboy
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 1,210
My comment was to relate the current increase with the previous (2018) changes to the appeals mechanism; the third stage appeal was put in by DfT as a 'passenger safeguard' but my comment isn't intended to offer an opinion on its effectiveness.
The main thing that I do try and get across is that the entire process is the responsibility of the DfT; TOCs do not get a penny of any extra money collected either in fares or penalties; they are operating to contractual terms dictated by DfT. The approach to Penalty Fares in terms of (lack of) any joined up thinking has been woeful and can be traced back to the lack of an overall strategic management structure for the industry - things like this just get kicked about.
I don't think anyone could disagree with you in your assessment there, but this is a completely different point to your original argument that passenger safeguards have increased. At the moment the third stage of appeal seems to function as little more than a rubber stamping exercise, and so it cannot in any meaningful way be said that there are increased safeguards.
Kite159
Veteran Member
I was on a (lesser spotted) TPE service from Manchester Airport yesterday, with the guard making a few announcements before departure about ensuring passengers had the correct ticket, both in terms of advances and not having a "Northern" or "TfW" only ticket). Also repeated the announcements at Piccadilly. Although that might be down to having RPIs on the train checking tickets.
As for the raise in penalty fares, if it makes someone who thinks payment is optional (the sort who will tend to make a bee-line for the front unit of a pair of 195/331/150/185s etc) think again when they get caught out it will work. The sort who will jump on a train at Meadowhall heading to Sheffield and only paying if they get caught by the guard (using that as an example of 2 stations without barriers where the train service is frequent enough)
As for the raise in penalty fares, if it makes someone who thinks payment is optional (the sort who will tend to make a bee-line for the front unit of a pair of 195/331/150/185s etc) think again when they get caught out it will work. The sort who will jump on a train at Meadowhall heading to Sheffield and only paying if they get caught by the guard (using that as an example of 2 stations without barriers where the train service is frequent enough)
SouthEastBuses
On Moderation
thedbdiboy
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 1,210
OK it's a subjective judgement but before 2018 there was a two stage appeals process and afterwards it was a three stage one, so it's definitely increased. I didn't pronounce on whether it was any better...
The only reason I brought it up was to highlight the asymmetric way that the process is approached. The origin of the 2018 changes had been a request to increase the Penalty Fare, but because at that time TOCs took revenue risk it suited Government to refuse that and instead require that passenger 'protections' were improved. Now given that there was already a two stage appeal process a real attempt to improve things would have been to overhaul that at the same time as uprating the 'Penalty' to be more effective so that the whole scheme worked better but the 'optics' for Government were better served by 'refusing' the increase because it was TOC money and creating a new third stage appeal process. Remember at that level it's all about PR/press releases and scoring points in Parliament.
Fast forward to 2022 and now the money is going to Government so suddenly they wake up to the need to increase the Penalty Fare. The reason they went ahead without any change to the appeal process is because, in their narrative, it was already dealt with in 2018. All I was doing was making the point that in Government's eyes, there was no need to address the appeals side because to them, it was already sorted. In that world, reality doesn't count for much.
I'm grateful for your explanation of the background (as, I am sure, are others), but it remains the case that this is a change which is in no way benefits passengers, and indeed in several important respects disadvantages them.
And although you describe the 2018 changes as an attempt to improve passenger protections, it did the complete opposite by removing many of the safeguards contained in the former Penalty Fares Rules, which explicitly codified that passengers could not be issued with Penalty Fares in situations such as unacceptable ticket office/machine waiting times, not being able to buy the ticket you want or to use the payment method you want, or using an Off-Peak ticket at a barred times.
Even if an increase in the level of Penalty Fares was unavoidable, it could have been implemented so much more effectively and fairly if the Department had done more than just asking leading questions with its sham of a "consultation".
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I've seen a classic yellow and black Helvetica one at Euston this evening showing the new amount, so not everyone has gone all (almost) Comic Sans.
As for WMT, they have been told once, had fixed it and someone has changed it back (with very poor grammar), which is appalling.
As for WMT, they have been told once, had fixed it and someone has changed it back (with very poor grammar), which is appalling.
It's surprising that each TOC has been allowed to do its own version, and got to choose the colours and typeface. These signs should be totally standardised and consistent - so as not to just look like the usual filler posters dotted around stations.
Just went to look at that on their website. Shocking (just for the benefit of anyone who hasn't seen the "updated" wording) :
How this was corrected and then changed back is beyond me.
There's one in Hither Green.
Perhaps the signs would have more impact if the header featured a skull and crossbones.
Or a picture of Mick Lynch with his arms folded
(copyright (ish) S Milligan 1956)
SouthEastBuses
On Moderation
One I thing I forgot to say, it's interesting to hear that using your ticket on an invalid route or company (e.g. going via Reading on a NOT VIA READING ticket) can result in a penalty fare. I would have thought that National Rail's terms and conditions (condition 6.3 I believe?) said that using a ticket on an invalid route or company just results in an excess fare and nothing more than that
A distinction has to be drawn between travelling on an invalid route (as per your Reading example) and travelling on an invalid company (e.g. using Thameslink on a Greater Anglia only ticket). The former is something for which a Penalty Fare cannot be issued - only an excess - whilst a Penalty Fare can be issued for the latter. This is clearly a nonsensically inconsistent situation but it's how the system currently works.
The difficulty is that TOC restrictions have been implemented by reusing the 'route' field on fares and tickets in a way that was never intended. So in some cases a TOC only restriction will be described as the 'route' of the fare.
Clearly there's room for improvement though, and so yet again you have to wonder why the government didn't bother to consult on standardised warning signage.
SouthEastBuses
On Moderation
So does that mean that if I were to travel from Banbury to Birmingham on CrossCountry on a Chiltern Railways only ticket, I would be liable to a penalty fare?
No, because CrossCountry is not a Penalty Fares operator.
SouthEastBuses
On Moderation
So I'd just have to pay an excess fare then?
No, you would be charged for a whole new ticket. You cannot excess a TOC-specific ticket.
I think it's just fallen back to a previous wording as this was challenged internally only about a month ago and it was corrected to include buying on board. I'll drop an email to alert them. Not sure if you'll get a response.
RPI
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 3,359
On the subject of Signage, SWR seem to have adopted the same yellow posters as GWR now, as opposed to the awful black ones that really were not obvious before.
Oh.
I'm used to TOCs "answering" questions in the manner of a prime minister at PMQ's, but do WMR customer services not even bother replying?
I'm glad that it was challenged before, anyway.
Sorry, I meant you'll probably only get a generic 'we'll pass this on' type response.
- Status