Should there be more warnings against fare dodging?

[Tarquin88]

I follow the postings in this section and there are frequent cases about the consequences of, for want of a better expression, paying less than the correct fare.

They cover the whole range: deliberately not paying anything because posters think they can get away with it, using somebody else’s pass, claiming railcard discounts to which they are not entitled, short-faring, using restricted tickets at the wrong time or on the wrong train etc. And then we see people panicking that their education/vocation/dream job/immigration application etc has been ruined or endangered by their action.

Are the warnings at stations and elsewhere sufficient? Is there a conspiracy on the part of TOCs to generate income from fines? Should, for instance, student loan forms warn applicants how easy it is to wreck your future prospects (or, at a minimum, cause yourself serious anxiety)? Everybody knows – don’t they – that shoplifting is theft so it might not be a good idea. On the other hand, underpaying for a journey accidentally/intentionally/fraudulently is seen as fair game. Why? Isn’t prevention better than cure?

 

[Haywain]

Is there a conspiracy on the part of TOCs to generate income from fines?

This, in particular, is a ridiculous suggestion. It is far cheaper to sell a ticket to a willing buyer than to try and recover it later. There may be a case to be made that there are occasions where it is not made sufficiently easy to buy a ticket but that's a very different matter.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

They cover the whole range: deliberately not paying anything because posters think they can get away with it, using somebody else’s pass, claiming railcard discounts to which they are not entitled, short-faring, using restricted tickets at the wrong time or on the wrong train etc. And then we see people panicking that their education/vocation/dream job/immigration application etc has been ruined or endangered by their action

It's perhaps worth noting that a lot of people are panicking entirely unnecessarily. Being picked up once for fare-dodging will not send you to prison, or stop you being a nurse or teacher. It might impact on working in the city, or becoming a lawyer, or immigration status - but not everyone who gets in touch with us has ambitions in those directions.

 

[baz962]

Of course there is a difference between people that make a mistake than those that deliberately fare evade , but do people seriously need to be told that fare evasion is wrong. Of course there should be adequate signage , but I'm sure most actual fare evaders care little for signage and would know right from wrong.

 

[Western Sunset]

Please, not more signs...

 

[Typhoon]

On the other hand, underpaying for a journey accidentally/intentionally/fraudulently is seen as fair game.

I have sympathy for passengers who buy the wrong type of ticket because they are confused about the rules on times when rates such as off peak kick in, or what company's trains you can travel on but that cannot come in the category 'fair game' as the passenger believes they have bought the right ticket (particularly applies at unstaffed stations). If there is anything that needs flagging up, it is any limitations there are on particular tickets, but those that buy a ticket not knowing that it is invalid on a particular journey don't know they are underpaying (unless caught)

There may be a case to be made that there are occasions where it is not made sufficiently easy to buy a ticket but that's a very different matter.

Now that is true, although I would add 'buy the correct ticket' as well, although I would suggest that this often leads to the passenger paying more as they cannot work out how the machine will give you a discount for your railcard/ buy some sort of rover ticket or whatever.

 

[AlterEgo]

Everybody knows – don’t they – that shoplifting is theft so it might not be a good idea. On the other hand, underpaying for a journey accidentally/intentionally/fraudulently is seen as fair game. Why? Isn’t prevention better than cure?

It’s not really the train companies’ fault if they aren’t warning people that stealing from them and defrauding them is a crime.

 

[Master29]

No. Pointless, as most that do it will do it anyway in spite of the risks

 

[dakta]

As above really, this board can be quite insightful but impression I gather is that a large proportion know it's wrong, take a calculated risk and the big mistake happens at the getting caught bit. I can't see increased signage denting this too much

I do have sympathy and a lot of it for those who actually do fall foul of the technicalities of the rules sometimes, though if you stick firmly to national rail enquiries guidance it's hard to see how

When is an Off-Peak ticket valid?

The trains that you can catch and the times that you can travel with an Off-Peak ticket vary considerably depending on the journey being made

 

[Deafdoggie]

I don't think supermarkets need signs saying customers must pay for their shopping, I don't think the railways need more signs telling people they must pay for their travel.
Buying online won't sell a ticket you can't use for the journey you input, so it's hard to make a mistake.
The only real way to solve confusion about off-peak times is to follow XC example of a blanket time of 9.30, which is very popular with forum members!
The answer really is, most people do know what they're doing. But there are a few genuine mistakes, but they are a very small number and notices would make no difference.

 

[mmh]

Buying online won't sell a ticket you can't use for the journey you input

Umm, yes it can.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Everybody already knows not paying for your travel is wrong. They don’t always know the consequences of getting caught but that is just tough. There is a very simple solution – if you want to pursue a career where honesty and integrity are essential then don’t break the law. If you suffer from anxiety then don’t put yourself in a position that is guaranteed to cause it.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Umm, yes it can.

If you've bought a ticket with an itinerary then it's valid.

 

[mmh]

if you want to pursue a career where honesty and integrity are essential then don’t break the law.

As someone mentioned earlier, this is something which is frequently mentioned on here to an extent it arguably shouldn't be, and results in numerous threads from young and understandably naive and inexperienced people terrified by what they've read on here before they post.

There are no careers which are barred to someone who has a criminal conviction, yet less a civil conviction, caution, or

People come for advice, not sanctimonious judgment.

I have a criminal record for a more serious offence than not having a valid ticket. That didn't stop me gaining SC clearance and working for the civil service in central government.

Please people, stop unnecessarily worrying those who come for the wealth of advice available on here.

 

[philosopher]

I follow the postings in this section and there are frequent cases about the consequences of, for want of a better expression, paying less than the correct fare.

They cover the whole range: deliberately not paying anything because posters think they can get away with it, using somebody else’s pass, claiming railcard discounts to which they are not entitled, short-faring, using restricted tickets at the wrong time or on the wrong train etc. And then we see people panicking that their education/vocation/dream job/immigration application etc has been ruined or endangered by their action.

Are the warnings at stations and elsewhere sufficient? Is there a conspiracy on the part of TOCs to generate income from fines? Should, for instance, student loan forms warn applicants how easy it is to wreck your future prospects (or, at a minimum, cause yourself serious anxiety)? Everybody knows – don’t they – that shoplifting is theft so it might not be a good idea. On the other hand, underpaying for a journey accidentally/intentionally/fraudulently is seen as fair game. Why? Isn’t prevention better than cure?

Having loads of warnings against fare dodging to me gives off a bad uninviting vibe for the railways. On the Greater Anglia service I was on today, the information screen kept showing a warning against fare dodging every two minutes that looked suspiciously like the Covid lockdown ‘Stay Home’ message used by government in 2020 and 2021. Not exactly the message you continually want to see.

Most people know it is wrong and so should not need reminding. Those who are intentionally do it are probably not going to put off by some warnings.

 

[Typhoon]

I do have sympathy and a lot of it for those who actually do fall foul of the technicalities of the rules sometimes, though if you stick firmly to national rail enquiries guidance it's hard to see how

The trains that you can catch and the times that you can travel with an Off-Peak ticket vary considerably depending on the journey being made

I appreciate what you have written but the Network Rail guidance is not the most helpful statement if you are standing in front of a Ticket Machine at a station where the ticket office is closed because of staff shortages/covid/ no reason. (Apologies if anyone reading this is so employed but) I have found the Assistance Units to be useless because the advice they give is so general (and not always correct in practice).
Not everybody books on-line. Fortunately, the usual staff at my second closest station are sound and explain (although last time ... - someone different, and, I hope, temporary).

 

[etr221]

Might I point out that split ticketing for the purpose of saving money (i.e. buying tickets A-B and B-C, for less than a ticket A-B-C, for a journey A-B-C, which I assume why most people do so) is - prima facie - fare evasion: anybody who does so has not paid the correct fare for their jouney (and does not intend to). In this case the railway (collectively, including ticket agencies) are acting as an accessory in facilitating this.

More generally, passengers can be divided into three groups:
At one extreme: Those who deliberately set out to avoid paying their correct fare - by not buying a ticket, or having one which they know is not valid. And do users of split tickets not come into this category?
At the other: Those who take great care to pay, and ensure they have paid, the correct fare for their journey.
And in between: those who intend to pay the correct fare, but have been unable (for some reason) to do so (but will when and if they have the chance); or have bought a ticket that they believe - and arguably are correct to - is valid, for the correct fare (which may or may not be the case).

The problem the railway has is that it expects passengers to pay the (or at least a) correct fare (and I think most people would agree with them), but without ensuring that they can always do so, and verifying (as far as is possible) before they travel that they have done so, and that has a complex fare system that means in many cases the 'right' ticket (hence fare paid) for a journey is not the 'best' (cheapest), and in which whether a ticket is valid is not at all clear (not helped by loose terminology): but which then works on the basis of penalising/prosecuting those who have got it wrong.

I do sometimes wonder (based on threads on this forum) how well ticket inspectors (who are expected to learn and know what is valid and what not) would do if given a test of say 1000 dubiously valid tickets and circumstances - how many would score 100%? Should they be expected to? And if they fail, with what consequences? And how well should other staff and passengers be expected to do?

A final thought: the number of possible fares (every possible variation, for every possible journey) probably is of the order of a billion...

 

[swt_passenger]

Might I point out that split ticketing for the purpose of saving money (i.e. buying tickets A-B and B-C, for less than a ticket A-B-C, for a journey A-B-C, which I assume why most people do so) is - prima facie - fare evasion: anybody who does so has not paid the correct fare for their jouney (and does not intend to). In this case the railway (collectively, including ticket agencies) are acting as an accessory in facilitating this.

…and yet section 14 of the current National Rail conditions of travel explains exactly how to do it? I expect you‘re in a very small minority of forum members who believe what you’ve just written here is correct.

 

[Haywain]

People come for advice, not sanctimonious judgment.

And advice is what they get - generally if very good quality - but it is fair to say that those entering, for example, the legal profession really ought to be aware of the consequences of their behaviour.

 

[70014IronDuke]

OP (and others) "fair dodging" ?

Isn't the very term playing down the very crime, potentially, you are talking about?

 

[py_megapixel]

OP (and others) "fair dodging" ?

Isn't the very term playing down the very crime, potentially, you are talking about?

I think any misspelling of "fare" as "fair" is merely a typo, and not intended to imply that it a fair thing to do at all.

 

[Starmill]

OP (and others) "fair dodging" ?

Isn't the very term playing down the very crime, potentially, you are talking about?

Doesn't sound like it to me. It clearly refers in context to people Intentionally trying to avoid paying. That doesn't count for everyone who gets into a dispute about it. It's probably just homophone trouble.

 

[mmh]

If you've bought a ticket with an itinerary then it's valid.

Perfectly possible to buy a ticket without an itinerary online, and I suspect the word itinerary is not in any relevant legislation. I doubt anybody outside this forum has ever used the word in c

Might I point out that split ticketing for the purpose of saving money (i.e. buying tickets A-B and B-C, for less than a ticket A-B-C, for a journey A-B-C, which I assume why most people do so) is - prima facie - fare evasion: anybody who does so has not paid the correct fare for their jouney (and does not intend to). In this case the railway (collectively, including ticket agencies) are acting as an accessory in facilitating this.

Well yes, you might point that out, in the bizarre manner of someone who wants to be a lawyer but isn't often uses.

Split ticket use is specifically allowed in the conditions of carriage that apply to all ticket holders.

Armchair lawyers are rarely of use.

 

[AlterEgo]

Might I point out that split ticketing for the purpose of saving money (i.e. buying tickets A-B and B-C, for less than a ticket A-B-C, for a journey A-B-C, which I assume why most people do so) is - prima facie - fare evasion: anybody who does so has not paid the correct fare for their jouney (and does not intend to).

That’s not what fare evasion is. Someone splitting tickets is paying the correct fare for their journey.

 

[etr221]

Well yes, you might point that out, in the bizarre manner of someone who wants to be a lawyer but isn't often uses.

Split ticket use is specifically allowed in the conditions of carriage that apply to all ticket holders.

Armchair lawyers are rarely of use.

I won't disagree with what you say.

But - while split ticketing is allowed - if it results in a lower fare then for the correct ticket, is that not "fare dodging"? Or is the railway overcharging for the correct ticket?

Someone splitting tickets is paying the correct fare for their journey.

No - they are they paying the correct fares for two journeys, neither of which they have actually made, even though together they make up the journey that they did.

Or do we have a fare system that is not fit for purpose?

Does 2+2=6 ? If the fare system says so, then I would suggest it isn't

It has failed the golden rule for fare systems: that for any journey, the 'best' and the 'right' fares should be the same.

 

[Richardr]

underpaying for a journey accidentally/intentionally/fraudulently is seen as fair game.

I'm not convinced that is correct for the vast, vast majority of rail users.

In addition, I don't see how accidentally, which to me by definition isn't "fair game" as you mean it fits in with any concept of intentional or fraudulent behaviour.

 

[mmh]

And advice is what they get - generally if very good quality - but it is fair to say that those entering, for example, the legal profession really ought to be aware of the consequences of their behaviour.

What are those consequences?

I hope you understand that my point is there are lots of people here who will give grave repercussions, but very little fact.

 

[yorkie]

I won't disagree with what you say.

But - while split ticketing is allowed - if it results in a lower fare then for the correct ticket, is that not "fare dodging"? Or is the railway overcharging for the correct ticket?

It's technically neither, though the latter is more accurate, but this is for a separate thread.

No - they are they paying the correct fares for two journeys, neither of which they have actually made, even though together they make up the journey that they did.

That isn't correct; a passenger may use two or more tickets for one journey and all good booking sites will try to calculate where this is the case.

It's absolutely not "dodging" anything to use an accredited website which calculates the cheapest combination, nor for anyone to make their own calculations and buy the tickets manually.

Indeed some journeys actually require two or more tickets.

Or do we have a fare system that is not fit for purpose?

Does 2+2=6 ? If the fare system says so, then I would suggest it isn't

It has failed the golden rule for fare systems: that for any journey, the 'best' and the 'right' fares should be the same.

This can be explored further in a new thread as it's beyond the scope of this thread.

Feel free to create one and link to it from here if you like. If you are suggesting changes to the fares structure, it would be best placed in the speculative discussion section.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 May 2022 ==

That’s not what fare evasion is. Someone splitting tickets is paying the correct fare for their journey.

Absolutely.

Might I point out that split ticketing for the purpose of saving money (i.e. buying tickets A-B and B-C, for less than a ticket A-B-C, for a journey A-B-C, which I assume why most people do so) is - prima facie - fare evasion: anybody who does so has not paid the correct fare for their jouney (and does not intend to)....

This is misleading/incorrect. What credentials do you have? Do you work in a role that involves railway ticketing and/or do you have any legal training?

This forum has people who do work in the area of railway ticketing and also has solicitors who are familiar with the relevant conditions, laws etc.

For the legal argument, I will tag @tspaul26 in to see if he would like to respond to your false claim.

 

[Haywain]

What are those consequences?

It obviously depends on the behaviour but criminal behaviour of any sort can be problematic for those wishing to enter such a profession.

 

[talldave]

Might I point out that split ticketing for the purpose of saving money (i.e. buying tickets A-B and B-C, for less than a ticket A-B-C, for a journey A-B-C, which I assume why most people do so) is - prima facie - fare evasion: anybody who does so has not paid the correct fare for their jouney (and does not intend to). In this case the railway (collectively, including ticket agencies) are acting as an accessory in facilitating this.

Totally disagree. Buying valid tickets and using them in a valid manner is not evasion. It's not the customer's fault that the rail industry has stupid anomalies that offer savings. Just as when the supermarket sell the bigger pack for less than the smaller one.

I've often bought a ticket to somewhere I'm not going because it's cheaper (I spent 3 years travelling on HS1 not going where my ticket was to). That's a bonus for the TOC as I'm not wearing out the seats, wheels and brakes for the entire journey my ticket is for!!