Amount of cash raised by TOC's in fines and UPN's etc

[daccer]

Whilst watching the "Railway" series recently it mentioned that Merseyrail issues 15,000 penalty fare notices per year. This made me wonder how much revenue is being generated by penalty fares, out of court settlements and fines in general by the TOC's over the course of a year.

From reading this forum over a period of time it does seem that many people are getting caught for avoiding small fares and are ending up paying large penalties when caught. Is there any figures for these totals and also the number of successful prosecutions and/or fines.

Lastly we do hear a lot about fare avoidance and how much this costs the railways each year. I was wondering if people saw some of this being somewhat balanced by the complex ticketing arrangements which will see lots of people paying twice (for missing specific trains on advance tickets) or overpaying by buying the wrong ticket as well as the additional revenue generated from penalty fares etc.

 

[michael769]

Fine revenue goes to the government so TOCs make nothing from that, but they probably get compensation orders and costs so will make a little, but probably less that what they lost pursing the case.

Penalty Fares and out of curt settlements on the otherhand will generate useful revenue, but is it likely to exceed the cost of running their revenue protection and prosecutions dept? It might be hard to find out, though some details may be in the annual reports of those companies that are publicly traded on the stock exchange.

 

[jb]

Lastly we do hear a lot about fare avoidance and how much this costs the railways each year. I was wondering if people saw some of this being somewhat balanced by the complex ticketing arrangements which will see lots of people paying twice (for missing specific trains on advance tickets) or overpaying by buying the wrong ticket as well as the additional revenue generated from penalty fares etc.

I'm sure that those who pay their fare are delighted by the balance provided by the fare dodgers.

 

[185]

I'm sure that those who pay their fare are delighted by the balance provided by the fare dodgers.

Not always, quite the opposite from many. Regular complaint from a growing number of (not the cleverest) commuters is.....

"this is disgusting. I've had my ticket checked EIGHT times this week!"

:roll:

 

[Ferret]

"this is disgusting. I've had my ticket checked EIGHT times this week!"

:roll:

Proof if ever it was needed that if some people had brains, they'd be dangerous.:roll:

 

[michael769]

I am always surprised by the reluctance of many commuters to sow their ticket.

Obviously being asked to show a train ticket on a train is a huge surprise and inconvenience to many.

 

[martinsh]

Obviously being asked to show a train ticket on a train is a huge surprise and inconvenience to many.

On some TOCs the novelty value comes as a shock !

 

[High Dyke]

I am always surprised by the reluctance of many commuters to sow their ticket.

Obviously being asked to show a train ticket on a train is a huge surprise and inconvenience to many.

And some of the worst can be season ticket holders that travel the same train / route daily... They seem to think that guards automatically know they have a valid ticket.

 

[RJ]

Proof if ever it was needed that if some people had brains, they'd be dangerous.:roll:

There is checking reasonably, then there is going OTT! On EMT, I have my ticket checked when passing through the barriers at St Pancras, then again by the TM on the train, especially on those non stop to Leicester. More often than not, RPI/O staff board at Leicester and demand to see all tickets, including those already checked, then once again at the barriers at my destination station.

4 times in a single trip of less than 2 hours is overkill in my eyes!

 

[gnolife]

I am always surprised by the reluctance of many commuters to sow their ticket.

Obviously being asked to show a train ticket on a train is a huge surprise and inconvenience to many.

If someone refuses to show a ticket, could they, in theory, get done under byelaw 18 (2)?

(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity
when asked to do so by an authorised person.

 

[Ferret]

There is checking reasonably, then there is going OTT! On EMT, I have my ticket checked when passing through the barriers at St Pancras, then again by the TM on the train, especially on those non stop to Leicester. More often than not, RPI/O staff board at Leicester and demand to see all tickets, including those already checked, then once again at the barriers at my destination station.

4 times in a single trip of less than 2 hours is overkill in my eyes!

In defence of the TM in that scenario, and with your knowledge of EMT's gateline staff, would you trust them to have known what's valid and what isn't?! I wouldn't!

Similarly, if I start a train off at a certain station that is barriered (in theory at least!), I'll make damn sure I've done a full check, just in case somebody has managed to get away with flashing an Ace of Spades or something...!

 

[trivran]

get away with flashing an Ace of Spades or something...!

I've got to try that next time (with a valid ticket for travel too of course). Knowing some barrier staff it'll probably pass.

 

[Tibbs]

Not always, quite the opposite from many. Regular complaint from a growing number of (not the cleverest) commuters is.....

"this is disgusting. I've had my ticket checked EIGHT times this week!"

:roll:

How about the opposite scenario?

I travel Watford to Euston, and like the vast majority of people boarding there have my ticket loaded onto my oyster. I can not recall having my ticket checked in the morning or evening peaks, and only very rarely later in the evening.

However, these ticket checks are pointless, because none of the Guards or RPIs have oyster readers! I'm sure anyone who wanted to could dodge fares easily when all they have to do is show an Oyster card knowing it'll never be checked to see what ticket is loaded onto it...

I wonder how much cheaper LM fares would be if they actually had the facility to check the tickets on their trains?

 

[Monty]

I find the is no real happy medium when it comes to ticket inspections, passengers will moan that checks are too frequent or not often enough. As others have mentioned it's the season ticket holders who are the usual culprits when it comes to complaints in this regard.

My personal opinion though is that it is not too unreasonable to expect a passenger to have their ticket inspected at the beginning, during and end of their journey, so a passenger travelling from Reading to Weybridge with a change at Virginia Water could be checked up to four times. I don't feel this is big thing to ask from passengers, or is it?

 

[Ferret]

Ah, but Monty - you fail to appreciate that although most are doing nothing else but vegetating on the train, being asked to show a ticket is an unthinkable hardship, and heaven forbid you should have to comply with such an unreasonable request as to spend 2 seconds showing a ticket, during which time you'd have done nothing whatsoever!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I'm not persuaded that the frequency of ticket inspections is the most useful factor in the range of measures taken to tackle widespread evasion.

I'm more of the view that it is the unpredictability of random and thorough inspections that will make a difference. As long as there are routes and travel patterns which leave some groups of passengers feeling that they have free travel, or that there are widespread abuses of tickets, then its going to take more than just more frequent checks by guards (which as we've seen, often adds little to an inspections at barriers).

Random checks at all sorts of places, by a team of 2 or more inspectors are likely to reveal a significant number of passengers who 'were running late', whose 'card didn't work', who 'didn't notice the ticket office', 'had left their wallet on the other train', 'must have been asleep when the Guard walked through' as well as those who 'forgot their new address'. Excuses which become less plausible when caught the second and third time.

As for the OP's original enquiry into the quantum of revenue from Penalties, Out of Court Settlements etx, I have no doubt that that revenue is far far lower than the amount lost through evasion - much of it being persistent evasion.

 

[Tibbs]

The out of court settlements is something that interests me.

A few years ago I claimed back my bank charges and I was entitled to my money back less any charges the bank itemised. They declined to do so and I got all of my money back.

Given that you basically bribe the TOC not to take you to court, I guess it's they don't need to be specific in their costs, but does anyone have a steer on how much is actual costs and how much is profit?

The bit that really makes me laugh is the 'inconvenience' payment that is often made. It reminds of the facilitation payments you often have to make when doing business in the Middle East & Africa.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The out of court settlements is something that interests me.
. . .
Given that you basically bribe the TOC not to take you to court, I guess it's they don't need to be specific in their costs,

Not quite right. There is no bribery, and I find that a scurrilous allegation. What there is, is a fraud or an evasion of liability. We'd better remember that it is the ticketless passenger who is at fault.
A Railway Company is in quite a neutral position when it comes to accepting either an Out of Court settlement or proceeding to Court. It is possible that the revenue from a Settlement may be higher that the amount awarded by a Court, but the Company's Prosecutor will still be attending the Court with a bundle of offenders to present to the Bench. The biggest variable for the passenger when agreeing a Settlement is that they would avoid having to pay the Fine - the Fine that is the right and proper penalty for their Crime, and a Fine which wouldn't go to the Company but to the State.

but does anyone have a steer on how much is actual costs and how much is profit?

Costs claimed are not, in my opinion, disproportionate to the costs incurred - in fact I'm quite sure that the true costs of some aspects of revenue protection are not recovered.

 

[Tibbs]

If the TOC takes you to court, and you're found guilty you get fined and that money bar costs goes to the court. If you pay an out of court settlement, all of that money goes to the TOC. Given that the TOC's responsibility is to its shareholders to make as much profit as possible, it stands to reason that they're going to go for the out of court settlement. When will they not go for an out of court settlement? When they think that taking someone to court will be more effective at preventing the traveller from evading a fare again and thus protecting future profits.

Try offering the Police an 'out of court settlement' if they're about to charge you with a crime and see where it gets you. What, you mean you've had another crime tacked onto the one you already have? Shocking!

The only similar thing I can think of with the Police is the Points / Speed Awareness course situation. However, the Speed Awareness course has been demonstrated to be more effective than points in preventing reoffending. Is there any evidence that out of court settlements are more effective than taking someone to court and convicting them? I'd be interested to see if any research has been done on this.

Any company with profit as its main motive should not have the power to take people to court and give them criminal records. There should always be someone independent in the mix (just as the Police have with the CPS) to assess the situation.

 

[Clip]

There is checking reasonably, then there is going OTT! On EMT, I have my ticket checked when passing through the barriers at St Pancras, then again by the TM on the train, especially on those non stop to Leicester. More often than not, RPI/O staff board at Leicester and demand to see all tickets, including those already checked, then once again at the barriers at my destination station.

4 times in a single trip of less than 2 hours is overkill in my eyes!

As you well know lots of trains depart and the barriers are not timed to let you through so its perfectly good practice for the TM to check in case someone was on wrong train or trying to bunk it further with ,say a Bedford ticket.

RPIs jobs is to check everyone's ticket on the train, the TM may not have got through to see everyone so this is also best practice.

And the same goes for the barriers at the end of your journey as it does at the start, lots of different journeys arriving so always good to have an extra layer of protection.

Its just good practice to ensure that everyone who is travelling has the correct ticket for their journey and I see no reason to complain about it.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I wonder if you might be making an incorrect assumption here:

If you pay an out of court settlement, all of that money goes to the TOC. Given that the TOC's responsibility is to its shareholders to make as much profit as possible, it stands to reason that they're going to go for the out of court settlement.

Are you assuming that when an Operator makes a settlement with a passenger who has no Defence against their Crime that the Company seeks to recover costs which are deliberately inflated by adding the amount that a Court would levy as a Penalty for the Offence? . . . . and thereby creating 'a profit'?

On what basis can you substantiate this allegation?

 

[NSEFAN]

I would guess that the out-of-court settlement option prevents re-offending.

For most of the people who come to these forums for help, the majority appear to be quite scared at the thought of a criminal conviction. They also give the impression in general that they were previously unaware of how seriously fare evasion is taken, or at least they didn't appreciate it as much.

Those who get back to us on the forums to let us know how it all goes often speak of their relief that the whole issue is over and done with. I'd say a shock like that would prevent most honest passengers from re-offending (and hopefully the dishonest ones, too!)

 

[martinsh]

Ah, but Monty - you fail to appreciate that although most are doing nothing else but vegetating on the train, being asked to show a ticket is an unthinkable hardship, and heaven forbid you should have to comply with such an unreasonable request as to spend 2 seconds showing a ticket, during which time you'd have done nothing whatsoever!

Yes, but you will have woken me up !

 

[Tibbs]

I wonder if you might be making an incorrect assumption here:Are you assuming that when an Operator makes a settlement with a passenger who has no Defence against their Crime that the Company seeks to recover costs which are deliberately inflated by adding the amount that a Court would levy as a Penalty for the Offence? . . . . and thereby creating 'a profit'?

On what basis can you substantiate this allegation?

Because it has to. A TOCs only responsibility is to maximise profits for its shareholders, within the legislation framework, though that last point is arguable. If offering an out of court settlement led to less profit, then they're obligated not to offer them.

Look at FCC with their move away from Penalty Fares and to simple Byelaw 18 prosecution - why do they do that? I would argue it's because there's more profit in taking people to court. Now whether that's because the PF is less effective at preventing reoffending (and thus future lost profit) or because they simply make more money from taking people to court and there is no impact on reoffending rates is actually irrelevant.

Also if the out of court settlement were a true reflection of costs, then they would vary much more than we see. What about Northern Rail's 'Fixed Penalty Fare' of £80? Can you say that for each case it tots up exactly £80 of costs?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would guess that the out-of-court settlement option prevents re-offending.

For most of the people who come to these forums for help, the majority appear to be quite scared at the thought of a criminal conviction. They also give the impression in general that they were previously unaware of how seriously fare evasion is taken, or at least they didn't appreciate it as much.

Those who get back to us on the forums to let us know how it all goes often speak of their relief that the whole issue is over and done with. I'd say a shock like that would prevent most honest passengers from re-offending (and hopefully the dishonest ones, too!)

From reading the posts on here, getting caught is the main driver to not reoffending. Most people post on here say that they're not going to do whatever it is they have done again now that they've been educated.

Of course it's possible that it's the fear of being prosecuted rather than from being caught, but in my case I travelled to Shepherds Bush without a ticket and the RPI (after much discussion, calm from me, heated from her) let me just buy my ticket at the window. Have I travelled without a ticket since? No!

 

[RJ]

As you well know lots of trains depart and the barriers are not timed to let you through so its perfectly good practice for the TM to check in case someone was on wrong train or trying to bunk it further with ,say a Bedford ticket.

RPIs jobs is to check everyone's ticket on the train, the TM may not have got through to see everyone so this is also best practice.

And the same goes for the barriers at the end of your journey as it does at the start, lots of different journeys arriving so always good to have an extra layer of protection.

Its just good practice to ensure that everyone who is travelling has the correct ticket for their journey and I see no reason to complain about it.

Oh, I understand the reasoning behind why it's done, but it doesn't stop the execution of it being overkill.

I'm in the camp that gating IC stations like St Pancras High Level is a bad idea, one reason being that tickets are only going to be checked on board anyway.

In defence of the TM in that scenario, and with your knowledge of EMT's gateline staff, would you trust them to have known what's valid and what isn't?! I wouldn't!

Similarly, if I start a train off at a certain station that is barriered (in theory at least!), I'll make damn sure I've done a full check, just in case somebody has managed to get away with flashing an Ace of Spades or something...!

I've gotten through the barriers at St Pancras with just about everything. For obvious reasons, the tickets I use almost never work the barriers so I always show them to the gateline assistant. I only ever had problems at the gateline once, that was when a TM withdrew the ticket I had and never came back to give me any paperwork.

Having such a rigorous revenue protection regime would probably work better if they provided training on tickets, but that's a matter for another thread!

 

[sheff1]

Its just good practice to ensure that everyone who is travelling has the correct ticket for their journey and I see no reason to complain about it.

Of course it is good practice and if that is what RPIs etc did I would support them 100%.

Unfortunately, as is clear from my own personal experiences and various threads on here, a minority do not ensure everyone has the correct ticket(s). Instead they claim correct tickets are somehow invalid and, as has been reported on here, extract money from people based on those false claims.

Now those who come on here who have been incorrectly charged are assisted in getting their money back, but I have have little doubt that many more pay up and move on for a quiet life (they may even believe the RPI is correct*). Extracting money from such people over and above the amount they have already legally paid boosts TOC revenue/profits.

* The sort of cases I am thinking of here are
- PF for being in 'First Class' on a declassified train
- incorrect Off Peak times
and so on.

 

[sarahj]

You might moan about ticket checks after you have just been through a barrier, but remember there are those that buy tickets to the next station just to get through the barrier. We have had a few cases recently on southern of people being caught with gold cards from A to B, but are staying on to C, C being way much further than B which might only be a mile away from A.

And yes, random is sometimes a good thing. On busy long rush hour trains I sometimes pick coaches to do by pure random.

Person trying it on today. 12 car. Stop at Earlswood, 10 car platform. Pass boards at coach 10 right next to me and heads straight for coach 12, sitting right at back. Ticket, errrr, single to motspur park. mmmmm

 

[RJ]

FCC have a poster up;

"Last year we reported 16,440 people for prosecution for fare evasion

Together they were made to £2,128,176.47 in fines, costs and compensation

They all received a criminal conviction. The average fine was £304. The average ticket price was £3.70.

It's not really worth it, is it?"

They also have large posters up with diagrams showing where exactly Oyster PAYG is valid and how to use Carnets.

 

[FenMan]

Last year we reported 16,440 people for prosecution for fare evasion.

So, on average, 45 people a day are reported by FCC.

The average evaded fare was £3.70, so FCC's loss of revenue averages £166 a day, or £60,000 a year.

Hmm ...

 

[island]

So, on average, 45 people a day are reported by FCC.

The average evaded fare was £3.70, so FCC's loss of revenue averages £166 a day, or £60,000 a year.

Hmm ...

Fallacy. You're assuming 100% of fare evaders are prosecuted.