Penalty Fare when machine not working

[Strat-tastic]

Has the notice been changed?

 

[najaB]

I have received a response to my second appeal. They have agreed in my favour that the wording of the out of service machine was not clear and I just need to pay the £4.60 single fare. Which I have paid today.

Glad to hear it, I thought that they might see sense.

 

[Typhoon]

I have spoken to the guard once when on the platform about a ticket. This was SWT, about 5 years ago at Petersfield on the first train of the morning to Portsmouth. The TVMs weren't working for some reason.

I simply asked can I buy a ticket once we're underway? he answered yes and I boarded the train. I then left him to do his dispatch duties and bought a ticket once we were clear of the station.

Same. Last year. South Eastern. Rural station (unstaffed at that time). 'Can I pay on board'. 'Yes'. Sat on the nearest seat to the guard to show intent to pay. Once I had paid, had a chat until the next station. Made a point of thanking him when I got off. A decent staff member, wanting to help like many other rail workers. Disappointing when the minority, for whatever reason, go out of their way to be difficult.

 

[Antman]

Update

I have received a response to my second appeal. They have agreed in my favour that the wording of the out of service machine was not clear and I just need to pay the £4.60 single fare. Which I have paid today.

I will also be writing directly to the train company as their signage is far below standard.

As a side note the machine as of today remains out of service this has been a minimum of 28 days.

Good, shame the train operator isn't fined for not keeping the TVM in working order.

 

[Realfish]

Has the notice been changed?

What might the new wording be? 'This machine is out of order, you must purchase a ticket from the ticket office or alternative machines before boarding'? Something along those lines would not be particularly customer friendly and passengers like the OP would similarly find themselves inconvenienced, potentially missing their trains having arrived in reasonable time to purchase their ticket.

I'm glad that the OP got a just outcome, by the way.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

What might the new wording be? 'This machine is out of order, you must purchase a ticket from the ticket office or alternative machines before boarding'? Something along those lines would not be particularly customer friendly and passengers like the OP would similarly find themselves inconvenienced, potentially missing their trains having arrived in reasonable time to purchase their ticket.

I'm glad that the OP got a just outcome, by the way.

If the TOC is going to insist on keeping that ludicrous policy then at least they should make their intentions clearer.

 

[Strat-tastic]

What might the new wording be? 'This machine is out of order, you must purchase a ticket from the ticket office or alternative machines before boarding'? Something along those lines would not be particularly customer friendly and passengers like the OP would similarly find themselves inconvenienced, potentially missing their trains having arrived in reasonable time to purchase their ticket.

I'm glad that the OP got a just outcome, by the way.

Well, up-thread, there is apparently a link to an approved form for such notices.

 

[robbeech]

I think In terms of earliest opportunity you must take one of the options :

Go to another platform or ticket office which may cause you to miss your train.

Run to another platform or ticket office which could cause injury and is discouraged.

Leave luggage unattended on the train whilst you seek out the guard, which is discouraged.

Wait for the guard to see you to sell you a ticket. Politely explain the machine isn’t working even if they don’t ask as they can report this.

 

[Antman]

I think In terms of earliest opportunity you must take one of the options :

Go to another platform or ticket office which may cause you to miss your train.

Run to another platform or ticket office which could cause injury and is discouraged.

Leave luggage unattended on the train whilst you seek out the guard, which is discouraged.

Wait for the guard to see you to sell you a ticket. Politely explain the machine isn’t working even if they don’t ask as they can report this.

I'd take it as meaning pay on the train, and passengers shouldn't have to go looking for the guard, or at the destination or interchange station. It's ridiculous that a train operator is trying to fine a passenger because their ticket machine wasn't working.

 

[robbeech]

Yes it’s ridiculous but at the same time it’s easy for them.

 

[najaB]

It's ridiculous that a train operator is trying to fine* a passenger because their ticket machine wasn't working.

Alternative view: passenger is found on board without a ticket, and rather than being reported for prosecution the passenger is given a penalty fare (a higher than normal fare) and told how they can appeal it if there are reasonable grounds. The only thing that borders on ridiculous is that, through malice or incompetence, the appeal wasn't accepted at the first stage.

*Mandatory pedantry - fines are imposed by courts, not TOCs.

 

[Antman]

Alternative view: passenger is found on board without a ticket, and rather than being reported for prosecution the passenger is given a penalty fare (a higher than normal fare) and told how they can appeal it if there are reasonable grounds. The only thing that borders on ridiculous is that, through malice or incompetence, the appeal wasn't accepted at the first stage.

*Mandatory pedantry - fines are imposed by courts, not TOCs.

Far better surely to have used some common sense and not issued a penalty fare? And yes you're right about fines.

 

[najaB]

Far better surely to have used some common sense and not issued a penalty fare?

The problem with that approach is that, had the OP been a chancer, they would have had a free journey.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The problem with that approach is that, had the OP been a chancer, they would have had a free journey.

Indeed, but there's only one organisation whose fault that would then be - WMT's!

 

[najaB]

Indeed, but there's only one organisation whose fault that would then be - WMT's!

Not necessarily. If a passenger says the machine is out of order and the RPI takes their word for it then it would be the passenger's fault, not WMT's if it turns out that the machine actually was working.

 

[etr221]

What sort of inspection regime and logging facilities do TVMs have?
I would expect them to be checked reasonably frequently - every few days, if not daily - and that any ticket issue, or other transaction, would be logged. Also if there is any report of one not working (whoever to) then it should be swiftly investigated - including examination of log to determine when it last was working - and either fixed straight away, or flagged as non-working (with that information available to RPIs and the like) - so that it should be unusual for an RPI to be faced with just one passenger's word that it was out of service (by the time the question comes up again, it will already have been reported).
And that in the event of any sort of appeal or prosecution, the inspection and ticket issue logs should be there as part of the evidence.

 

[najaB]

so that it should be unusual for an RPI to be faced with just one passenger's word that it was out of service (by the time the question comes up again, it will already have been reported)

I can't agree that this will be always be true - there will always be some lag time between the machine breaking and all RPIs being aware of this. It should be measured in hours or minutes, rather than days but it's unreasonable to expect it to be instant.

And that in the event of any sort of appeal or prosecution, the inspection and ticket issue logs should be there as part of the evidence.

This I can agree with wholeheartedly. The OP's appeal should have been accepted at the first stage.

 

[baz962]

The problem with that approach is that, had the OP been a chancer, they would have had a free journey.

Of course you are right in normal circumstances. But the op took and produced a photo of the out of order machine , so in this instance common sense should have been used on board , in my humble opinion of course.

 

[nuts & bolts]

What sort of inspection regime and logging facilities do TVMs have?
I would expect them to be checked reasonably frequently - every few days, if not daily - and that any ticket issue, or other transaction, would be logged. Also if there is any report of one not working (whoever to) then it should be swiftly investigated - including examination of log to determine when it last was working - and either fixed straight away, or flagged as non-working (with that information available to RPIs and the like) - so that it should be unusual for an RPI to be faced with just one passenger's word that it was out of service (by the time the question comes up again, it will already have been reported).
And that in the event of any sort of appeal or prosecution, the inspection and ticket issue logs should be there as part of the evidence.

What could assist customers wishing to purchase tickets from an out of order machine, if an Out of Order hood was placed over machine to alert this.

Most TVM's have remote monitoring and wil alert respective ticket control units of faults.

If ticket machines are out of use for a considerable period, then it will possibly be awaiting a part from the manufacturers.

 

[najaB]

Of course you are right in normal circumstances. But the op took and produced a photo of the out of order machine , so in this instance common sense should have been used on board , in my humble opinion of course.

I suppose it depends on what 'common sense' is used - neither of us were there so this is speculation, but the RPI's thought pattern could easily have been something like: "I'll issue a penalty fare so that I'm not seen as playing favourites by anyone else I issue a penalty fare to, but he'll have no problem appealing it."

I mention this because a frequent comment by posters in this part of the forum is: "But the nasty RPI didn't issue a penalty fare to the other person, it must be because I'm <insert characteristic here>".

 

[nuts & bolts]

Perhaps I am seeing things through the lens of my local train company - South Western Railway. I always thought that if boarding a train without a ticket then it was the passenger's duty to find the train's guard to sell them a ticket (either while the guard is opening/closing doors and has hopped onto the platform temporarily at the station, or onboard). I have a feeling I have read this somewhere, but can't remember. Anyway, happy to be corrected, and thanks for the knowledge.

Nothing wrong with this attitude.

I would never approach a guard who's doing platform duties - they are doing safety critical operations and there's always the chance that someone could end up being caught and dragged because the guard was distracted. I suppose if it's a station with a long dwell then maybe it wouldn't be so bad.

It's not a bad idea to seek out the guard when on board, but it definitely isn't a requirement.

When boarding a train near the guard just ask "can I buy one from you".

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I suppose it depends on what 'common sense' is used - neither of us were there so this is speculation, but the RPI's thought pattern could easily have been something like: "I'll issue a penalty fare so that I'm not seen as playing favourites by anyone else I issue a penalty fare to, but he'll have no problem appealing it."

I mention this because a frequent comment by posters in this part of the forum is: "But the nasty RPI didn't issue a penalty fare to the other person, it must be because I'm <insert characteristic here>".

Penalty Fares should never be issued where the authorised collector knows that it will be successfully appealed. The TOC doing so would risk being on the hook for damages for unlawful use of personal data (as they would have no lawful reason to do so).

 

[etr221]

I can't agree that this will be always be true - there will always be some lag time between the machine breaking and all RPIs being aware of this. It should be measured in hours or minutes, rather than days but it's unreasonable to expect it to be instant.

My expectation would be that the RPI would have some kind of 'phone a friend' facility, that would let them get them an up to date status - and update the status - more or less instantly - with two RPIs on a train the answer might be 'your mate reported this a moment ago' - and if there is remote monitoring, the 'friend' should have access to this.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

My expectation would be that the RPI would have some kind of 'phone a friend' facility, that would let them get them an up to date status - and update the status - more or less instantly - with two RPIs on a train the answer might be 'your mate reported this a moment ago' - and if there is remote monitoring, the 'friend' should have access to this.

This is exactly what the rules used to explicitly state. Nothing else is acceptable.

 

[vidal]

How difficult (or expensive) would it be to have a single interface on all TVMs? Maybe something like the National Rail app which allows me to buy any ticket combination with railcards etc.

I don't travel much by train - it's mainly for leisure and the difference interfaces between different operators is very confusing.

James

 

[nuts & bolts]

How difficult (or expensive) would it be to have a single interface on all TVMs? Maybe something like the National Rail app which allows me to buy any ticket combination with railcards etc.

I don't travel much by train - it's mainly for leisure and the difference interfaces between different operators is very confusing.

James

Recently the Rail Delivery Group announced that ticket choice and purchasing would be simplified, but that was also announced a couple of years previously.

 

[najaB]

My expectation would be that the RPI would have some kind of 'phone a friend' facility, that would let them get them an up to date status - and update the status - more or less instantly - with two RPIs on a train the answer might be 'your mate reported this a moment ago' - and if there is remote monitoring, the 'friend' should have access to this.

This is exactly what the rules used to explicitly state. Nothing else is acceptable.

Many TVMs use 'dial on demand' network connections, rather than being constantly connected. As such there would be no indication that the machine is offline until it fails to check in. I don't know what the frequency is, but I'd be very surprised if it's less than every 15 to 30 minutes. As such, a machine could be offline for up to an hour (typically you don't alert until the second missed check-in) before it was flagged up anywhere.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Many TVMs use 'dial on demand' network connections, rather than being constantly connected. As such there would be no indication that the machine is offline until it fails to check in. I don't know what the frequency is, but I'd be very surprised if it's less than every 15 to 30 minutes. As such, a machine could be offline for up to an hour (typically you don't alert until the second missed check-in) before it was flagged up anywhere.

If that really is the case (and I'd like to hope it isn't), that's wholly unacceptable.

 

[najaB]

If that really is the case (and I'd like to hope it isn't), that's wholly unacceptable.

I don't work in the rail industry, but I've worked in IT and telecoms for quite a while and this a perfectly normal way to set things up. You don't waste bandwidth costs on always-on connections for devices that are only going to require intermittent connectivity (think a TVM at a station that gets 4 trains an hour). And alerting on one failed check-in is a recipe for wasted callouts.

 

[Llanigraham]

Penalty Fares should never be issued where the authorised collector knows that it will be successfully appealed. The TOC doing so would risk being on the hook for damages for unlawful use of personal data (as they would have no lawful reason to do so).

How is the "authorised collector" supposed to know if there is going to be a successful appeal?
And under exactly what legislation are the TOC going to be sued for unlawful use of personal data? There is nothing in GDPR that stops this in this sort of situation.