Emigrating to the USA can be more challenging with a criminal record, the offences play a huge part here, someone with a record for GBH or Murder is unlikely to be able to move there. Someone who got on the wrong train is not going to have any real problems. Also, they’re spent after a year.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
I'm getting uncomfortable reading the disputes forum now - they are making me lose confidence in traveling with Advance tickets.
- Thread starter miklcct
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
johncrossley
Established Member
The USA doesn't recognise the concept of spent offences for the purposes of immigration.
It isn’t a deterrent, people just won’t pay up.
Sure, make it less likely that a person would face too much hassle for a honest mistake, or more crucially a mistake on the railway.
Whether a conviction is "spent" or not in the eyes of the UK is completely meaningless when it comes to emigrating to another country.
johncrossley
Established Member
In other countries they have high penalty fares rather than criminal records. So there's still a deterrent without being unnecessarily harsh.
Duly noted, does it affect the other statement though.
That you CANNOT emigrate to the USA and MOST other countries if you have a criminal record.
I’ve indirectly known people emigrate to the USA with more serious criminal records than getting on the 1103 instead of the 1106.
I’m not against this. I just feel that given the vast majority of prosecutions are from fare evaders and I’m not aware of a recent case of someone getting a criminal record from a RoRA offence for a genuine mistake let alone an incorrect procedure on the part of the staff.
A conviction for fare evasion is indeed spectacularly unlikely to meaningfully affect emigration.
I would expect the chances of successful emigration to the USA following a dozen prosecutions for fare evasion would be an order of magnitude more likely than after one prosecution for possession of cannabis, for example.
Snow1964
Established Member
The wrongs in each case was the railway screwed up by failing to provide the train at correct time for the ticket they sold.
.... then instead of giving passenger a grovelling apology, they sent out letters with threats of prosecution AND criminal records.
Might not ultimately get that far, but if it is first time in your life that you receive such a letter, you are not going to be up to speed with fact that they are unlikely to follow through. What's more the customer has to reply and explain and interact even though the problem wasn't of their making. Strict liability backwards.
Just a gentle nudge that this thread is about losing confidence when travelling in Advance tickets. Anyone wanting to discuss the impact of a criminal record in visiting other countries should start a new thread in General Discussion.
johncrossley
Established Member
If a member of the general public finds this thread through an internet search, they may be put off from using Advance tickets, which may well be the only tickets that they consider affordable. That means they don't take the train. And rightly so. The railway has created this situation and should suffer the consequences.
That is false.
You left out the middle step*: the passenger afforded the railway no opportunity to correct the first mistake by speaking to a member of staff.
*I've not read the threads, but feel reasonably confident this is the case.
Last edited:
njamescouk
Member
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2017
- Messages
- 185
which is more likely to happen?
Really? Ludicrous overreaction in my opinion.
No. Just get the train you’ve bought a ticket for. It really isnt that difficult. And if things go a bit wrong, ask for help
Not sure why this is specifically related to advance tickets
I didn’t think even Lee Anderson MP would go quite that far
I imagine the passengers in the linked threads, who acted perfectly reasonably, would disagree with your sentiment...
And if you're unable to get anyone to help you, let alone give you a sensible response? What if - as is extremely common - you're fobbed off and told to wait hours until the next train operated by your booked operator?
johncrossley
Established Member
If it doesn't matter whether you have a criminal record or not, why do the TOCs threaten passengers with a criminal record?
njamescouk
Member
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2017
- Messages
- 185
the railway is a hostile environment so far as I'm concerned. I'm pretty sure of the rules going a couple of stops down the line with the local monopoly trainco, but any more than that? not likely.
bought a long distance ticket once and was given the choice of "any permitted" or "not via London". via London would have been a huge dog leg but didn't get a reply as to whether any permitted meant via London was ok!
then there's the prices: I bought a car a while ago and the marginal cost of driving is *way* cheaper plus there's much less chance of an unpleasant confrontation, "attitude tests" and the like.
bought a long distance ticket once and was given the choice of "any permitted" or "not via London". via London would have been a huge dog leg but didn't get a reply as to whether any permitted meant via London was ok!
then there's the prices: I bought a car a while ago and the marginal cost of driving is *way* cheaper plus there's much less chance of an unpleasant confrontation, "attitude tests" and the like.
johncrossley
Established Member
The quoted threads show that these TOCs have treated their passengers disgracefully, so they don't deserve our custom.
Wallsendmag
Established Member
No we were in Italy for a Champions League game in Milan and a local decided to help themselves to our FIP passes from our bag.
I'm afraid your confidence is misplaced. Even if you had been correct in your assumption, and even if one accepted that the passenger should be under an obligation to afford the railway an opportunity to correct its mistake - how can prosecution possibly be deemed a reasonable penalty for failing to do so?
But a tiny proportion of their customers though
Do you boycott any organisation where you’re aware of a customer being treated “disgracefully”?
This is not an absolue rule. It depends on the severity of the offences commited.
Wallsendmag
Established Member
I haven’t been in Sports Direct for about 12 years
johncrossley
Established Member
Those are just the ones that post on this forum.
If they treat us like dog poo, boycotting seems to be only right thing to do.
That wasn’t what I asked you
johncrossley
Established Member
If I can reasonably avoid the company, then yes.
They do, however, take note of the nature of the offence, how long ago it was committed, and whether the applicant has kept himself or herself out of trouble since then.
Someone repeatedly short faring or "doughnutting" is more likely to get barred than someone who got on the wrong train for their advance ticket.
lyndhurst25
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 1,418
I too am wary if Advance tickets for the reasons mentioned above, and I am familiar with the rules! I certainly wouldn’t be recommending using Advance tickets to friends and family who are not familiar with train travel.
I think that they pertinent questions, that I have yet to see a definitive answer for, are -
1) The Advance ticket terms and conditions state that “If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey.”. Will the railway honour this with the spirit that it is clearly intended? Some have argued, incorrectly in my opinion, that this does not apply to the first train on your journey, only to subsequent missed connections.
www.nationalrail.co.uk
2) The EU PRO rules state that you have to be delayed by more than an hour before the railway is obliged to re-route you to you destination. Surely “re-routing” means exactly what it says i.e. taking a train by a different route or operated by a different TOC, and not taking the next train operated by your booked TOC over the same route?
I think that they pertinent questions, that I have yet to see a definitive answer for, are -
1) The Advance ticket terms and conditions state that “If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey.”. Will the railway honour this with the spirit that it is clearly intended? Some have argued, incorrectly in my opinion, that this does not apply to the first train on your journey, only to subsequent missed connections.
Advance Train Tickets | National Rail
Book ahead and save money with Advance tickets. They are great value, and ideal for saving money on long journeys. They must be bought in advance and are only valid on the date and train specified.
2) The EU PRO rules state that you have to be delayed by more than an hour before the railway is obliged to re-route you to you destination. Surely “re-routing” means exactly what it says i.e. taking a train by a different route or operated by a different TOC, and not taking the next train operated by your booked TOC over the same route?
90 or even 95% of the time, staff will either be pragmatic or there will be ticket acceptance etc. to allow the use of the next train, so it's not an issue. So in that sense, the railway then does honour that condition.
The problem is the 5 or 10% of cases where customers are told off, charged extra, issued with a Penalty Fare or even prosecuted. Even one such case is too many, but as we have seen here on the forum, it is a regular occurrence - we must bear in mind that we only see a tiny percentage of all such cases, so they cannot be dismissed as "isolated incidents".
The anticipated delay has to be more than an hour, yes. There can be no doubt that re-routing includes travel on other operators, based on ECJ precedent from the (in this respect analogous) EU261 regulation.
The problem is that the industry has done absolutely nothing to train frontline staff on the rights that passengers have under the PRO, as it falsely believes that the NRCoT already caters to this. Even that is problematic, as whilst staff may have a passing acquaintance with the concept of the NRCoT, training on its contents is extremely limited.
Overall, a seismic shift in industry attitude would be needed to address the issues raised here. Unfortunately there is no sign that anyone in a position of authority is even aware of the problems, let alone that they acknowledge them or are taking steps to rectify them.
Two of those cases are examples of the passenger not contacting the operator for advice on what to do, one of which involved trying to claim a train over 12 hours later was the next available service, and then claiming that the PRO rules mean they could unilaterally change which train they wanted to catch. The other was someone trying to use a LNER only ticket on a Lumo service, which escalated to the point of being kicked off the train at an unscheduled stop.
The final example was of someone rushing on to the first train they saw as they believed it to be theirs, only to find out it was a delayed service that happened to be in the station at the time the other train was due to depart.
- Status