Revenue protection - too strict?

[gray1404]

Moderator note: the first few posts in this thread have been split from Arriva Trains Wales Fare Dodging Prosecution

I'm really happy with the outcome here. It is a real shame Arriva Trains Wales (or rather, TIL) are being so strict on taking things all the way to court.

 

[Clip]

I'm really happy with the outcome here. It is a real shame Arriva Trains Wales (or rather, TIL) are being so strict on taking things all the way to court.

Yes what a shame they prosecute people who travel without a valid ticket.

What would you like them to do next - taxis from station to door in the name of good customer service?

 

[gray1404]

I think they should take people to court who don't pay their fares. HOWEVER, if someone realises the error of their mistake and attempts to resolve it before court then they should be afforded this. Moreover, if they are not a repeat offender. It just seems totally unreasonable for someone to realise their wrong and try to put it right and still be ignored in their attempts to settle.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Is prosecuting and fining fare dodgers the best way to deal with fare evasion? Yeah, I'd say so

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Is prosecuting and fining fare dodgers the best way to deal with fare evasion? Yeah, I'd say so

IMO fare evasion, unless to the level of being fraud, should be an entirely civil matter. I'd be much happier for Penalty Fares enforcement via the County Court to become a thing* - unpaid CCJs are ruinous for credit, and can inhibit some people from getting or keeping certain jobs, but they're generally less serious than a criminal conviction.

*Provided the Penalty Fares Rules are strictly adhered to, and non-compliance punished severely. It's a good thing the currently operated PF schemes don't tend to lead to County Court proceedings, as some TOCs are in systemic violation of one or more parts of the Rules.

 

[najaB]

I think they should take people to court who don't pay their fares. HOWEVER, if someone realises the error of their mistake and attempts to resolve it before court then they should be afforded this. Moreover, if they are not a repeat offender. It just seems totally unreasonable for someone to realise their wrong and try to put it right and still be ignored in their attempts to settle.

Isn't this just taking 'pay when challenged' to the next step 'pay when prosecuted'?

 

[AM9]

I wanted to reply to the above, but didn't want to clutter up the other thread.

Isn't this just taking 'pay when challenged' to the next step 'pay when prosecuted'?

The key words in gray104's post are:

... if someone realises the error of their mistake and attempts to resolve it before court ...

the words don't make it clear which mistake revenue protection staff are being unreasonable about:

1) a lapse of memory or genuine misunderstanding of the conditions of travel
or
2) the wisdom of gaming the system, - either hoping that they won't see a guard/rpo/etc., - or bluffing their way through when they are challenged​

In the case of 1), then any reasonable observer would probably accept the granting of a bit of leeway - (once), but those who think that 2) is deserving of such treatment are presumably sympathetic to any thief being similarly accommodated in the wider criminal sense.

 

[Slimjim1]

I agree that sometimes the railway takes revenue protection in a manner that the assumption is that everyone is aiming to defraud the railway and travel for free. Recently I attended a meeting which meant I chose to stay in a hotel the night before the meeting. I booked an Anytime Day Single from the station near the hotel the day before to ensure that if there were any rush hour queues I would be able to travel with my ticket (as the railway would like everybody to do). Due to unforeseen circumstances I could not attend the meeting. An email to the TOC asking for a refund has not been answered some three months later (compare this with the efficiency deployed in correspondence when chasing a Penalty Fare/prosecution) and from reading about refunds to tickets I will be charged a fee of £10 because I paid the railway in advance. Why did I pay in advance? Because of the inadequate ticketing facilities at some stations and the railways inability/lack of desire to understand that not everybody is out to defraud the railway and that some times there are important events in peoples lives that mean that a wait in a queue (due to TOC greed in not providing adequate facilities together with what is sometimes bordering on abuse of a very tightly drafted law with regard to fare evasion). I would suggest that the £10 fee for changing/refunding an Anytime / Off Peak fare be refunded on (say) three occasions per year when the passenger has bought their ticket in advance. More ticket machines would also be welcome.

 

[Puffing Devil]

If this were, say, shoplifting, the first offence will probably be met with a Penalty Notice, followed by a caution, followed by a court appearance. For first time offenders committing an offence akin to shoplifting, it would make senses to see a parallel. There is sometimes a rush to court.

 

[baz962]

Is the post originally quoted more to do with mistakes. I have never fallen foul, but more by luck than judgement, the amount of things I have read since joining this forum that I never knew, such as certain tickets requiring you to circumvent zone one etc.

 

[farleigh]

Totally agree that a first 'offence' (mistake?) should not lead to court and certainly not a criminal conviction.

I always find it strange when posters say to somebody who appears on here ' 'you have committed a criminal offence'.

They normally put that in bold too.

 

[Any_Permitted]

One thing I have never understood about some TOCs is that they seem reluctant to mention prosecution as a threat. This is particularly aimed at Southern: over a year ago they brought in posters saying “Nervous about not having a ticket? You could be at risk of a penalty fare if you don’t have the right ticket for your journey.” This suggests that the worst thing they can do is give you a penalty fare, which let’s face it, isn’t much of a deterrent.

Surely a bigger deterrent would be “Nervous about not having a ticket? If you are caught without a ticket we can take you to court, where you may receive a £1000 fine, 3 months imprisonment and a criminal record which will severely affect your job prospects.” That is the point of prosecuting people right? To serve as a deterrent to others.

I also picked up a SWR penalty fares leaflet which only mentioned prosecution once throughout. There just seems to be this opinion with people I know that a £20 penalty fare is the worst thing that can happen to them if they travel without a ticket. I myself didn’t know about Byelaw 18 until I found this forum.

DETERRENT DETERRENT DETERRENT. I believe a TOC should prosecute people, but they should also warn people as much as possible through posters and leaflets that YOU WILL be taken to court. That way less people try and chance it, earning the TOC more revenue, and the people who end up in court are the extreme fare-dodgers, not someone who thought they could buy their ticket from the guard.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

It is a matter of fact that those Investigators examining the circumstances of an alleged fare evasion adopt a policy where by a Prosecution can be avoided by a first-time offender where the fare is a simple unpaid journey, and where they engage with the Investigators (usually by responding honestly to correspondence). The more 'outraged' posts on this thread suggest that those posting them believe otherwise, perhaps they don't actually have the facts to support their views, or that their concept of 'first-time', 'simple unpaid journey' or 'engage with' differs from mine.
I posted some hard facts on here just a week ago which showed the significant proportion of those which unfortunately fail those tests, and so do proceed towards Prosecution, are still resolved or otherwise abandoned without Trial.

Sadly there are very many who are just opportunist 'chancers' who know what they are doing and do it repeatedly, and there are many who lie in the hope that their lie will be believed when all the more popular lies can be detected quite simply. These passengers are likely to make a lot of noise accusing the Railways Cos of their failings in the vain hope that it masks their own errors. It would be wise to be cautious in adopting those accusations of 'unfairness' from such a biased complaint.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Its a simple concept if you want something you have to pay for it. If you want to ride on a train pay for it.

 

[Fare-Cop]

DETERRENT DETERRENT DETERRENT. I believe a TOC should prosecute people, but they should also warn people as much as possible through posters and leaflets that YOU WILL be taken to court.

No TOC has done more in the way of posters and warnings than ATW in the past 5 years.

I understand that one recent Court saw 18 cases listed where the majority entered guilty pleas, two of whom were given conditional discharges, not because of any failing in the evidence that they intended to avoid a fare by offering short, but because the Court took into consideration the particular career path the two young male defendants were embarked upon. All of the others that pleaded guilty were fined and all were ordered to pay costs & compensation.

 

[hexagon789]

In the case of 1), then any reasonable observer would probably accept the granting of a bit of leeway - (once), but those who think that 2) is deserving of such treatment are presumably sympathetic to any thief being similarly accommodated in the wider criminal sense.

Precisely how I feel, if someone has made an honest mistake you would hope they wouldn't be punished for it, but someone who deliberately says the boarded 3 stations further down the line than they did just to say a few quid should get everything they deserve.

 

[6Gman]

Totally agree that a first 'offence' (mistake?) should not lead to court and certainly not a criminal conviction.

I always find it strange when posters say to somebody who appears on here ' 'you have committed a criminal offence'.

They normally put that in bold too.

Getting on a train at Pontypool and then telling staff at Cardiff that you got on at Newport isn't a mistake. It's a lie. With intent to defraud the railway of its rightful payment.

It's all well and good saying "first offence" but who is going to maintain this database of first offences?

 

[hexagon789]

Getting on a train at Pontypool and then telling staff at Cardiff that you got on at Newport isn't a mistake. It's a lie. With intent to defraud the railway of its rightful payment.

It's all well and good saying "first offence" but who is going to maintain this database of first offences?

Indeed, there need to be proper fines to deter these all too common incidents.

 

[farleigh]

Getting on a train at Pontypool and then telling staff at Cardiff that you got on at Newport isn't a mistake. It's a lie. With intent to defraud the railway of its rightful payment.

It's all well and good saying "first offence" but who is going to maintain this database of first offences?

Don't really care who maintains it but I guess TOCs would be a starting point. I still think it would be better than potentially ruining somebody's career as that does not seem measured to me.

 

[MikeWh]

Totally agree that a first 'offence' (mistake?) should not lead to court and certainly not a criminal conviction.

I always find it strange when posters say to somebody who appears on here ' 'you have committed a criminal offence'.

They normally put that in bold too.

A criminal offence doesn't always lead to a criminal conviction. The fact that it may be settled out of court doesn't change the fact that it's a criminal offence. Sadly a lot of people don't realise the severity of their "mistake", and don't accept it even when told.

 

[Reedyy99]

As someone VERY recently involved in this, and getting a lucky break meaning I won't have a criminal record, the whole process of this has completely opened my eyes to why the train companies do this.

I for one will never even think about doing something like that again, and have learnt a very hard lesson to think so, meaning realistically their protocols have served their purpose.

EDIT: Although throughout the whole process I still believe that the train companies should stop treating those committing this act like criminals. Unless done to a massive level I find it ridiculous that, for example, someone caught speeding will receive a fine and points even though they could very easily kill someone by doing so.

 

[neilmc]

All this sounds very well but based on the cases I have read on this forum I would be genuinely afraid of endeavouring to take a short-notice train journey from anywhere other than a well-staffed major station with an open and manned ticket office.
Otherwise:
- you arrive at the station and the ticket seller is off on a break
- the ticket machine is broken
- the ticket machine won't take cash
- the ticket machine won't sell you the ticket you require
- the ticket machine is on another platform which requires you to exit the station and make a circuitous journey by which time you will have missed your train
- the guard does not come down the train to sell you a ticket

So you arrive at your destination without a ticket. RPIs are waiting to pounce and may well endeavour to prosecute you for the failings and shortcomings of the TOC. I am not a legal expert but I believe that the byelaws governing train travel are extremely biased to the rail operators at the expense of the consumer, which in any other market would be deemed unreasonable, and you CAN end up with a criminal record having had no intention whatsoever of committing a criminal act.

 

[matt_world2004]

I think operators threatening prosecution when there is an ambiguity over the validity is heavy handed .there have been several cases on here where people have been threatend with prosecution with valid tickets

If an RpI doesnt know if a ticket is valid or not they shouldnt be threatening prosecution

 

[hexagon789]

I think operators threatening prosecution when there is an ambiguity over the validity is heavy handed .there have been several cases on here where people have been threatend with prosecution with valid tickets

The emphasis should be on trying to make sure that doesn't happen, but I maintain that when people knowingly short-fare, travel without valid tickets they should have the book thrown at them.

 

[matt_world2004]

The emphasis should be on trying to make sure that doesn't happen, but I maintain that when people knowingly short-fare, travel without valid tickets they should have the book thrown at them.

The popular example is the southern only one on the gatwick express

 

[hexagon789]

The popular example is the southern only one on the gatwick express

Yeah, I've heard that one is particularly rife.

 

[6Gman]

All this sounds very well but based on the cases I have read on this forum I would be genuinely afraid of endeavouring to take a short-notice train journey from anywhere other than a well-staffed major station with an open and manned ticket office.
Otherwise:
- you arrive at the station and the ticket seller is off on a break
- the ticket machine is broken
- the ticket machine won't take cash
- the ticket machine won't sell you the ticket you require
- the ticket machine is on another platform which requires you to exit the station and make a circuitous journey by which time you will have missed your train
- the guard does not come down the train to sell you a ticket

So you arrive at your destination without a ticket. RPIs are waiting to pounce and may well endeavour to prosecute you for the failings and shortcomings of the TOC. I am not a legal expert but I believe that the byelaws governing train travel are extremely biased to the rail operators at the expense of the consumer, which in any other market would be deemed unreasonable, and you CAN end up with a criminal record having had no intention whatsoever of committing a criminal act.

Seeking out the guard* will prevent you facing a RORA charge.


* Yes, I accept that some trains are DOO, and that some guards - allegedly - shut themselves in the back cab.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Just to follow on from my observation that many 'reports' on here are not based in fact, but are mere opinion, opinion often perpetrated by others on the forum :-

The popular example is the southern only one on the gatwick express

Yeah, I've heard that one is particularly rife.

How many prosecutions for a Criminal Offence have been successfully convicted for a passenger travelling on Gatwick Express services on an otherwise valid 'Southern only' ticket in the real world?
And while we're checking, how many unsuccessful prosecutions for the same alleged offence have arisen in that same real world?
[Genuinely interested in any non-zero reports.]

 

[hexagon789]

Just to follow on from my observation that many 'reports' on here are not based in fact, but are mere opinion, opinion often perpetrated by others on the forum :-
How many prosecutions for a Criminal Offence have been successfully convicted for a passenger travelling on Gatwick Express services on an otherwise valid 'Southern only' ticket in the real world?
And while we're checking, how many unsuccessful prosecutions for the same alleged offence have arisen in that same real world?
[Genuinely interested in any non-zero reports.]

Oh it's probably negligable, but from the numbers of times it comes up on this forum, you'd think it happened quite frequently.

 

[causton]

Oh it's probably negligable, but from the numbers of times it comes up on this forum, you'd think it happened quite frequently.

The thing about this forum is that it is not a representative example of the whole of the country. There is lots of discussion about some things, and not much or any discussion about other things. This is due to where people live, work, or have interest in. Quite a few people are interested in the GTR 'brand' shambles with regards to operator-specific tickets, so we will hear about it a lot. In a similar vein you might think that every TOC is looking for work for the 442s ... at least until recently now they actually do have some work!

Being on the other side of the coin, being an Authorised Collector of Penalty Fares, I wish the system was tightened up from both ends. There are so many people where we struggle to find out who they actually are and they may get away with it. Equally on the other end of the scale where prosecutions are concerned, perhaps unless major fraud is concerned some of the punishments may be too harsh!