Railway staff lying to the BTP

[bb21]

I've read the Penalty Fares Regulations, and I do not believe that a PF can be issued merely for being 'off route', as is the case here;

That would be my interpretation. Otherwise if HS1 is not a route restriction then what is it?

 

[RJ]

Mark Reckless MP has posted at least two updates on his blog and newsletter to the effect that his constituents appear to have been improperly charged PFs, and that he is investigating: http://markreckless.com/category/hs1/

Southeastern do appear to have been charging PFs in these circumstances for at least three years, as per: http://www.thisiskent.co.uk/Medway-...tory-12016632-detail/story.html#axzz2TmbI12iI

I've read the Penalty Fares Regulations, and I do not believe that a PF can be issued merely for being 'off route', as is the case here; furthermore, I consider it reprehensible that Southeastern are using the threat of prosecution to effectively force passengers to pay an invalid PF.

If I were given a PF in these circumstances, I would pay under protest, wait six months, and then sue for the recovery of the difference between the correct excess fare due and the invalid PF extracted under threat of prosecution.

Perhaps it can be arranged for a few local ad campaigns to go out to establish if this is something that has been affecting a significant number of people. I'm not having Southeastern try the same rubbish on me and forcing me waste my time training their experienced staff on these very basic rules.

Having exhausted the procedures in place to have the matters put right between myself, Southeastern and the RPSS at a personal level, I will shortly be continuing with the process of formally reporting the matter with a view to it being put right for myself and any other passengers who may have had funds unduly extracted from them. I'm not going to sit back and allow the serious issue of a TOC allowing their staff to charge Penalty Fares which they know are not legally entitled to go unabated.

 

[island]

If I were given a PF in these circumstances, I would pay under protest, wait six months, and then sue for the recovery of the difference between the correct excess fare due and the invalid PF extracted under threat of prosecution.

That course of action was suggested in another thread some months back. I can't find it now, but if memory serves, the conclusion was that it would not be likely to be a productive one.

 

[W230]

Time to contact those consumer action groups and give Watchdog (or silmilar) a ring?!

 

[yorkie]

Time to contact those consumer action groups and give Watchdog (or silmilar) a ring?!

I could certainly put Watchdog etc in contact with numerous victims of SET (and other rogue TOCs) and give examples of how they try to get out of written contracts (NRCoC, booking confirmations etc).

 

[maniacmartin]

The problem with consumer TV shows like Watchdog is that they dumb everything down as much as possible - apparently watching Matt Alright gob off and drive around on his motorbike is more interesting than real issues.

As such, I don't think they'd take the time to explain or explore properly something as complex as our ticketing system in a useful or fair way.

 

[island]

That's not necessarily a bad thing; they could go on for ages about how people were "fined" for using a ticket that was invalid due to a "technicality".

 

[W230]

That's not necessarily a bad thing; they could go on for ages about how people were "fined" for using a ticket that was invalid due to a "technicality".

I agree with this - so, said ticket was valid within NRCoC but passenger was still PF'd. The matter was taken up with IRCAS (or whoever it is who deals with appeals) and the matter was still dealt with incorrectly..etc etc and then cue a disgruntled passenger having to do the TOCs homework for them.

Though I can imagine the TOCs just fobbing the story off with some comment about "antiquated ticketing and improving staff training..."

 

[maniacmartin]

Though I can imagine the TOCs just fobbing the story off with some comment about "antiquated ticketing and improving staff training..."

I was thinking more upon the lines of the TOC replying "Passenger was trying to from London to Hackney via Cambridge [for example], which is clearly absurd. Passengers using loopholes like this cost us money and drive up ticket prices for everyone else."

It's easy to see how this could be presented to make the savvy passenger the bad guy if the things are only summarised

 

[talltim]

I was thinking more upon the lines of the TOC replying "Passenger was trying to from London to Hackney via Cambridge [for example], which is clearly absurd. Passengers using loopholes like this cost us money and drive up ticket prices for everyone else."

It's easy to see how this could be presented to make the savvy passenger the bad guy if the things are only summarised

Yes, they could portray it along the lines of the tax avoidance debates at the moment. Big businesses using legal means to avoid tax costing everyone else, passengers using legal means for cheaper tickets costing everyone else.
Legal, but immoral.

For the record I don't have a problem with people/businesses using legal means to avoid cost. I do have a problem with the rules being badly written to create the loopholes and I definitely have a problem with TOCs ignoring the rules as they stand .

 

[jon0844]

In the case of tax laws, it's certainly the case the the Government (and opposition, as in Ed Miliband talking about it today) should shut up about this 'morality' crap when it is only a law change that could solve things.

Why should a company operating in loads of different countries not just have a single HQ and a single place to process all orders and manage finances? Don't like it? Change the law, introduce a flat-rate corporation tax throughout the EU or whatever.. don't just moan, especially when it isn't just Starbucks, Amazon and Google doing it.

Likewise, some foreign businesses have opted to use the UK to have an HQ instead of elsewhere for tax reasons. Are we not going to blame them too?

Just as with ticketing, if it's legal to use a particular ticket combination then that's it. Change the rules, don't try and make out that any passenger is in some way trying it on or not following the 'spirit of the law'.

 

[talltim]

I definitely agree, just saying that that how the TOCs could spin it

 

[jon0844]

I definitely agree, just saying that that how the TOCs could spin it

Indeed. That's definitely what they'd do.

Many people already seem to think that split ticketing is in some way dodgy, so it wouldn't be hard to convince everyone of that being the case. Then you'd have the public, many being jealous of not being able to make the same savings through ignorance or laziness, demanding that all loopholes are removed.

 

[talltim]

If it would mean that ticket prices would go down all round and ticket pricing would become simple and transparent, I would like them close the loopholes. However it they wouldn't and it won't so the status quo is better.

 

[Flamingo]

Nobody is going to be able to design a revenue-neutral ticket structure that is going to result in nobody paying more, people need to accept that and move on.

 

[jon0844]

I'm very keen for all new ways of thinking on ticketing, which may well do away with cost savings by split ticketing but hopefully better in the long run for the average customers and regular users (smartcards with automatic discounts, price capping etc).

And, yes, there will be losers but it does have to, and ultimately will, happen.

Until it does, those that take advantage shouldn't be treated like they are and enjoy things while they last.

 

[RJ]

The system is what it is. The structure is not changing anytime soon, which means that people have plenty of time to familiarise themselves with it. I practice what I preach.

It's as complicated as you make it. If you're unhappy with complexity, buy a through ticket for the journey being made and be done with it!

 

[jon0844]

Technology will change ticketing eventually though, but I think you're safe for some time yet.

 

[island]

Nobody is going to be able to design a revenue-neutral ticket structure that is going to result in nobody paying more, people need to accept that and move on.

Correct. In fact, it's mathematically impossible.