Queue Waiting.

[khib70]

I am at a loss to understand the point being made in the above post. I was the passenger who witnessed the incident, I have no axe to grind, I merely recounted the incident exactly as I perceived it, including my personal perception of unreasonable and intimidating behaviour. Both towards the lady involved and to myself.

This perception appeared to be shared by other passengers as they also intervened, in itself a most unusual situation on trains around London.

The words in my post were chosen based on the facts of what actually happened on that train. I can therefore only assume that the writer who considers my post a "rant" and suggests that the inclusion of "magical" words such as "intimidation" confirms some ulterior motive on my behalf, must be biased as well as rude.

Perhaps the behaviour was entirely justified because it has been established beyond any reasonable doubt by people with no knowledge of the circumstances, that the lady involved in this incident was part of a ruthless, Southend based, fare dodging cartel :-?

I'm also at a loss. Well done you and your fellow passengers for making a stand on that occasion.

It's an indisputable fact, based on my travel experience that the vast majority of TOC staff in all capacities are professional, friendly and helpful, and also that there are people out there who consider actually paying for rail travel some sort of cruel imposition.

There is, however, a minority of posters on here who, no matter how unreasonable or unacceptable the behaviour of a rail staff member, will seek to justify it. These same people will also attempt to blame or stigmatise the passenger at every juncture. They're not typical of posters on here.

What happened to this lady was clearly unacceptable. Three people leaning over my seat and questioning my honesty would fit my definition of intimidating behaviour. In addition to "not being able to sell tickets", did none of the three have access to the information that the passenger had no opportunity to pay up to that point. Given that you managed to find the information on your own phone, it seems unlikely. And what part of the ByeLaws obliges passengers to carry currency in a particular form?

The tiny number of staff who behave inappropriately merely make life difficult for their more professional colleagues, and anyone who rushes to defend them does likewise, IMO.

 

[Antman]

Is a ticket office 'in working order' if it can't sell you a ticket within 20 minutes?

No. Can you imagine going into a pub or a supermarket and waiting 20 minutes to be served? Why should it be anymore acceptable at a railway station? I think most railway staff would accept this, I was at Dartford recently and the ticket office was closed and only one ticket machine was working, the man on the gate was waving people through and asking them to pay at their destination.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm also at a loss. Well done you and your fellow passengers for making a stand on that occasion.

It's an indisputable fact, based on my travel experience that the vast majority of TOC staff in all capacities are professional, friendly and helpful, and also that there are people out there who consider actually paying for rail travel some sort of cruel imposition.

There is, however, a minority of posters on here who, no matter how unreasonable or unacceptable the behaviour of a rail staff member, will seek to justify it. These same people will also attempt to blame or stigmatise the passenger at every juncture. They're not typical of posters on here.

What happened to this lady was clearly unacceptable. Three people leaning over my seat and questioning my honesty would fit my definition of intimidating behaviour. In addition to "not being able to sell tickets", did none of the three have access to the information that the passenger had no opportunity to pay up to that point. Given that you managed to find the information on your own phone, it seems unlikely. And what part of the ByeLaws obliges passengers to carry currency in a particular form?

The tiny number of staff who behave inappropriately merely make life difficult for their more professional colleagues, and anyone who rushes to defend them does likewise, IMO.

Very well put, I couldn't agree more.

 

[Haywain]

No. Can you imagine going into a pub or a supermarket and waiting 20 minutes to be served? Why should it be anymore acceptable at a railway station?

All very well, but at a pub or supermarket you wouldn't take the goods and expect to be able to pay later. So, in those terms, if the queue at the station is too long you are at liberty to choose not to use the train.

 

[Antman]

On a similar vain .... how long should a customer wait to purchase a ticket to exit a station where no ticketing facilities have existed at their origin station and the guard is unable to sell you a ticket. This has happened 3 times with Northern, boarding a train at HIN to MAN, after the ticket office at HIN has closed and no TVM available. On each occasion at MAN there has been a queue of at least 60/70 people trying to purchase a ticket to exit the station. On each occasion the wait has been around 30 minutes and on one occasion resulted in being late to the event I was attending. Appears that even if you get to the station in plenty of time, have an intention to pay, depart and arrive on time by train - you can then still face severe delays, none of which are your fault!

Clearly this is totally unacceptable and nobody could be blamed if they did leave without paying. If a train operator wants everybody to pay (and not unreasonably so) then they have to do their part as well and I think most railway staff would acknowledge that.

 

[timbo58]

Unfortunately Antman, people would be blamed if they left without paying, despite the delay.

You cannot take or use services without payment, if you are legally obliged to do so, there is nowhere within railway law that allows non payment based on delays caused.
Clearly though I agree that a TOC needs to ensure there are adequate facilities.

There are always massive queues every year for Reading festival goers to purchase tickets -why?
They knew they'd have to purchase before travel.
Should Reading station let them all buy later as the queue is 2 hours long?

Ditto Glasto and Castle cary, as long as the TOC are making a reasonable effort to provide the ticket issuing facilities it is inevitable occasionally that delays will occur.

 

[Antman]

All very well, but at a pub or supermarket you wouldn't take the goods and expect to be able to pay later. So, in those terms, if the queue at the station is too long you are at liberty to choose not to use the train.

Yes but if that happened at the Rose and Crown I can go to The Bell, if it happened at Sainsburys I can go to Tesco, if it happened at my local station..............??
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Unfortunately Antman, people would be blamed if they left without paying, despite the delay.

You cannot take or use services without payment, if you are legally obliged to do so, there is nowhere within railway law that allows non payment based on delays caused.

And up to a point I fully accept that but as I said previously the rail industry need to do their bit and a queue like that is clearly unacceptable

 

[Tom B]

You queue for 20 minutes to obtain a ticket (because the fact that the station operator provides insufficient facilities is not deemed acceptable for you to buy on the train - possibly whilst staff mill around the barriers whilst there are empty ticket windows) and miss your hourly train. You thus obtain a full refund as you were delayed by the TOC. Who gains anything?!

 

[timbo58]

Can you get a refund in such circumstances?

 

[Antman]

Unfortunately Antman, people would be blamed if they left without paying, despite the delay.

You cannot take or use services without payment, if you are legally obliged to do so, there is nowhere within railway law that allows non payment based on delays caused.
Clearly though I agree that a TOC needs to ensure there are adequate facilities.

There are always massive queues every year for Reading festival goers to purchase tickets -why?
They knew they'd have to purchase before travel.
Should Reading station let them all buy later as the queue is 2 hours long?

Ditto Glasto and Castle cary, as long as the TOC are making a reasonable effort to provide the ticket issuing facilities it is inevitable occasionally that delays will occur.

In fairness Reading festival is exceptional circumstances but the train operators should be making all reasonable efforts to reduce waiting times

 

[Haywain]

Yes but if that happened at the Rose and Crown I can go to The Bell, if it happened at Sainsburys I can go to Tesco, if it happened at my local station..............??

Go and get on a bus or in a taxi. Or don't go at all. These choices are yours.

 

[khib70]

Go and get on a bus or in a taxi. Or don't go at all. These choices are yours.

Well, there's a one-sentence summary of the attitude displayed by some posters. "We'll provide lousy customer service, then sting you for a PF, and if you don't like it, catch a bus"

A passenger boarding at a rural station with a scanty or no bus service, and no taxis, trying to get to work on time, doesn't have any of those choices.

Far too much "like it or lump it" mentality on here.

 

[maniacmartin]

OK, I have a question.

Let's say there's a hypothetical station that has a ticket office that is staffed from 0900 onwards and the station has no TVMs. I turn up at 08:59 and there is already a massive queue of people. The ticket office opens at 09:00, and by 09:20 when my train is due to depart I still haven't made it to the front of the queue.

Am I entitled to just board and pay later? Does this ticket office constitute an 'opportunity to buy'? I would think not.

 

[PhilipRhayader]

Well, there's a one-sentence summary of the attitude displayed by some posters. "We'll provide lousy customer service, then sting you for a PF, and if you don't like it, catch a bus"

A passenger boarding at a rural station with a scanty or no bus service, and no taxis, trying to get to work on time, doesn't have any of those choices.

Far too much "like it or lump it" mentality on here.

Well said.

I'm being completely put off rail travel by some of the views expressed here.

 

[Llanigraham]

Clearly this is totally unacceptable and nobody could be blamed if they did leave without paying. If a train operator wants everybody to pay (and not unreasonably so) then they have to do their part as well and I think most railway staff would acknowledge that.

If they leave without paying they are immediately committing an offence and leaving themselves open for prosecution.

And someone said they wouldn't have to wait that long in a supermarket. We don't use supermarkets, but regularly hear off people waiting that long at busy times of the year. If they left with their shopping without paying they would be prosecuted as shop lifters.

Whatever people say the 2 are the same..thieves!

 

[timbo58]

Yes,
The TOC has provided an opportunity to pay.
The queue, whilst relevant, isn't able in itself to overrule the bylaws that pertain.

There is a lot of opinion on this thread, and we are all entitled to our own of course.

However what the TOCs provide, what they have to provide contractually and legally and what bylaws passengers using services have to adhere to or pay a penalty under are only disputable in court normally, nothing we say here is going to change that.

I think it's fairly evident whichever side you fall naturally on, or how ever hard you try to have a balanced view to all parties, we all sympathise with honest passengers who have to wait inordinate amounts of time to comply with the bylaws and other obligations.

No one is saying it is right that anyone should not have a proper reasonable opportunity to pay, however a lot of the situations mentioned here are not an everyday occurrence IME by any means, all could be deemed as 'exceptional' in fact.

If this, however, is another real, recent experience then I would urge reports being made to the TOC concerned immediately since they clearly have not provided adequate services.

 

[najaB]

OK, I have a question.

Let's say there's a hypothetical station that has a ticket office that is staffed from 0900 onwards and the station has no TVMs. I turn up at 08:59 and there is already a massive queue of people. The ticket office opens at 09:00, and by 09:20 when my train is due to depart I still haven't made it to the front of the queue.

Am I entitled to just board and pay later? Does this ticket office constitute an 'opportunity to buy'? I would think not.

If the reason for the queue is just an unexpectedly large number of people buying ticket, then no you would not be entitled to board without paying as there are facilities in working order. The exception to this would be if the TOC concerned has a stated maximum queuing time.

I would, however, expect station staff to give you permission to travel and purchase on board or at your destination.

 

[Antman]

OK, I have a question.

Let's say there's a hypothetical station that has a ticket office that is staffed from 0900 onwards and the station has no TVMs. I turn up at 08:59 and there is already a massive queue of people. The ticket office opens at 09:00, and by 09:20 when my train is due to depart I still haven't made it to the front of the queue.

Am I entitled to just board and pay later? Does this ticket office constitute an 'opportunity to buy'? I would think not.

I'd say 20 minutes was more than enough and you are entitled to board a train without a ticket and I know many rail staff would agree with me even if the rulebook says otherwise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If they leave without paying they are immediately committing an offence and leaving themselves open for prosecution.

And someone said they wouldn't have to wait that long in a supermarket. We don't use supermarkets, but regularly hear off people waiting that long at busy times of the year. If they left with their shopping without paying they would be prosecuted as shop lifters.

Whatever people say the 2 are the same..thieves!

I would argue that they have been given no reasonable opportunity to pay and expecting people to queue for up to half an hour at an excess fare window is totally unacceptable.

I have certainly never waited that long at a supermarket even at very busy times but you do have the option of leaving the shopping and taking your custom elsewhere, obviously you have already made the train journey so you can't 'give it back' if you see what I mean.

 

[Deerfold]

I'd say 20 minutes was more than enough and you are entitled to board a train without a ticket and I know many rail staff would agree with me even though the rulebook says otherwise.

You misunderstand the meaning of "entitled".

I'd agree it's ridiculous that someone might have to wait that long and still miss a train but nonetheless you'd be comitting an offence if you did it without permission.

 

[Haywain]

Well, there's a one-sentence summary of the attitude displayed by some posters. "We'll provide lousy customer service, then sting you for a PF, and if you don't like it, catch a bus"

A passenger boarding at a rural station with a scanty or no bus service, and no taxis, trying to get to work on time, doesn't have any of those choices.

Far too much "like it or lump it" mentality on here.

Utter nonsense! Antman was talking about the alternatives/competition in other (rather irrelevant) circumstances. I was simply stating what the alternatives are in the railway example. However, there are laws that prevent jumping on a train without a ticket when an opportunity to pay is provided, just the same as there are laws to prevent shoplifting.

Just as there are railway staff, and supporters of railways who say things that others don't like, there are also an awful lot of posters on this forum who seem to delight in finding circumstances that are extreme so that they can berate railway staff. Far too much of that as well. But it's an internet forum, so brevity is essential, and that sometimes reads as bluntness. Those who are too sensitive really shouldn't be contributing.

 

[Antman]

You misunderstand the meaning of "entitled".

I'd agree it's ridiculous that someone might have to wait that long and still miss a train but nonetheless you'd be comitting an offence if you did it without permission.

So you are both agreeing and disagreeing with me?

Maybe entitled is the wrong word but it depends how the rulebook is interpreted. I'd say if you've waited 20 minutes and not been served then you've had no reasonable opportunity to buy a ticket.

 

[bravot]

So you are both agreeing and disagreeing with me?

Maybe entitled is the wrong word but it depends how the rulebook is interpreted. I'd say if you've waited 20 minutes and not been served then you've had no reasonable opportunity to buy a ticket.

Which is only your opinion and does not constitute any form of lawful authority.

 

[Antman]

Which is only your opinion and does not constitute any form of lawful authority.

Says who? As I have already pointed out most railway staff are perfectly reasonable people and take the same view.

 

[Llanigraham]

I'd say 20 minutes was more than enough and you are entitled to board a train without a ticket and I know many rail staff would agree with me even if the rulebook says otherwise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I would argue that they have been given no reasonable opportunity to pay and expecting people to queue for up to half an hour at an excess fare window is totally unacceptable.

I have certainly never waited that long at a supermarket even at very busy times but you do have the option of leaving the shopping and taking your custom elsewhere, obviously you have already made the train journey so you can't 'give it back' if you see what I mean.

Hope you get that in writing!

What a surprise that you find it unacceptable! Tough, that's the way it is.

 

[Antman]

Hope you get that in writing!

What a surprise that you find it unacceptable! Tough, that's the way it is.

Did you not read the post I made about gateline staff at Dartford waving people through because only one ticket machine was working and the ticket office was closed? And no, nobody asked for it in writing:roll:

As for 'tough that's the way it is' well until such time as it is challenged in court we'll never know, but thankfully common sense normally prevails as the vast majority of railway staff are customer oriented.

 

[najaB]

As for 'tough that's the way it is' well until such time as it is challenged in court...

It's challenged every time a Byelaw 18.1 prosecution is laid before the court and the TOC wins virtually every time.

As explained in this post, if the ticket office is open and you get on a train without a ticket you better hope you have permission, or next stop could be court.

 

[Antman]

It's challenged every time a Byelaw 18.1 prosecution is laid before the court and the TOC wins virtually every time.

As explained in this post, if the ticket office is open and you get on a train without a ticket you better hope you have permission, or next stop could be court.

We're just going round in circles here.

As various postings have shown, and from my own observations, people do board without tickets when they are unable to buy one within a reasonable period of time and in most cases it doesn't seem to be a problem. Regardless of what the rulebook says does anybody think it acceptable for people to have to queue for 20-30 minutes because there are insufficient facilities at a particular station? I will say that I've never waited that long but others clearly have.

 

[najaB]

As various postings have shown, and from my own observations, people do board without tickets when they are unable to buy one within a reasonable period of time and in most cases it doesn't seem to be a problem.

The reason we're going around in circles is because this is the Disputes and Prosecutions section of the forum. People have been, and will continue to be, brought before the courts because they boarded without a ticket. It is not acceptable to simply say that they "should be fine", and "in most cases there doesn't seem to be a problem" when the potential result is a criminal prosecution.

I stand by what I've said several times - if the queue is excessively long, you cannot assume that you will be able to buy on board or at your destination and you are not entitled to board the train. In these circumstances you should seek authority from staff before you board the train.

 

[Deerfold]

So you are both agreeing and disagreeing with me?

Maybe entitled is the wrong word but it depends how the rulebook is interpreted. I'd say if you've waited 20 minutes and not been served then you've had no reasonable opportunity to buy a ticket.

I'm disagreeing with your use of the word entitled. It may be unfortunate but the law puts you in the wrong if you board a train without permission because of an excess wait. It does not put the train company legally in the wrong (morally may be quite different but that's not how the law works.

I'd hate anyone to read that this is what they're entitled to do and end up in court or hundreds of pounds worse off because they thought this was true.

 

[timbo58]

The reason we're going around in circles is because this is the Disputes and Prosecutions section of the forum. People have been, and will continue to be, brought before the courts because they boarded without a ticket. It is not acceptable to simply say that they "should be fine", and "in most cases there doesn't seem to be a problem" when the potential result is a criminal prosecution.

I stand by what I've said several times - if the queue is excessively long, you cannot assume that you will be able to buy on board or at your destination and you are not entitled to board the train. In these circumstances you should seek authority from staff before you board the train.

Hallelujah.

This is the correct LEGAL standpoint.

As I did try to allude to earlier more than once IIRC, there are differing OPINIONS on what constitutes 'fairness' in regards to queueing and it's time constraints.

Fortunately I cannot think anyone doesn't sympathise with those who are left waiting too long.
However:
a) I don't think this is a regular, 'normal' occurrence (although, to be fair, I have heard it as a reason for not having a ticket many times in my previous career)
b) If it was a regular occurrence, I repeat, regular everyday occurrence, the TOC need to know about it so they can rectify any issue.
c) It isn't being helpful to state your opinion (however heartfelt it is) if that opinion goes against the legal standpoint.

Once an opinion is given, I am sure we all respect that, there is no point in repeating it.

-How would you feel if you were wrongly advised by persons that appear to otherwise be knowledgable on this forum and went onto getting a PF or worse because of it?

The facts are only a person AUTHORISED by the TOC can allow passengers to pass by what is legally regarded as the 1st opportunity to purchase a ticket.

In the scenario that is quoted, the most important person mentioned is the ticket examiner/guard/(senior) conductor of the train.
Only persons that outrank that person (in terms of ticketing) can overrule their authority, this is usually NOT the ticket seller /chargeperson on a smaller station who has no authority to demand the train staff accept ticketless passengers.

Luckily most railstaff (as correctly stated) WILL use their judgement when dealing with ticketless passengers, however this does NOT in any way, shape or form guarantee they will allow these passengers to be treated as if NO ticket issuing facilities were provided at the joining station.

Discretion works both ways, it isn't simply a route of the least resistance.

 

[khib70]

Utter nonsense! Antman was talking about the alternatives/competition in other (rather irrelevant) circumstances. I was simply stating what the alternatives are in the railway example. However, there are laws that prevent jumping on a train without a ticket when an opportunity to pay is provided, just the same as there are laws to prevent shoplifting.

Just as there are railway staff, and supporters of railways who say things that others don't like, there are also an awful lot of posters on this forum who seem to delight in finding circumstances that are extreme so that they can berate railway staff. Far too much of that as well. But it's an internet forum, so brevity is essential, and that sometimes reads as bluntness. Those who are too sensitive really shouldn't be contributing.

Or in other words - "like it or lump it". I will continue to contribute, with or without your permission, thank you.

If you'd bothered to read my original post you would have seen that I made a point of highlighting the professionalism and quality of the majority of rail staff, and the existence of cynical fare-dodgers.

My problem is with those (by no means always railway staff) who defend the status quo at all costs, and will not accept that any TOC, its employees or agents are EVER in the wrong.