Appealing unpaid fares notice

[sheff1]

.. but a nice simple excess is perhaps the worst option in the long run.

I think the worst option is one I witnessed the other day:

* Discounted ticket but 'couldn't find' railcard.

* Told she must pay for a new full fare ticket. Not sure how much, but obviously more than £30 as she said 'I only have £30. Can't I pay up to the normal price ?' Guard said 'No, but try and find your railcard and I will come back.'

* When guard returned now-tearful girl still hadn't got a railcard. Guard said 'OK I will let you go this time but make sure you carry your railcard next time'.

Obviously, I do not know whether the passenger was genuine or not. She had, though, expressed a willingness to pay (up to) £30 for an excess but ended up paying nothing.

 

[yorkie]

Trouble is the T&C on railcard application which states no railcard then treat as no ticket held & charge passenger for a new ticket.
Its a toothless tiger as punishment dont fit the crime, bit like shop putting up a sign saying shop lifters will be prosecuted might state that but it dont always happen

Crime? If you have reasonable grounds to suspect crime is being committed, don't issue any ticket at all and take down their details for investigation.

Reasonable grounds could be the same passenger using the "I forgot..." excuse on the same train day after day, for example.

If there is evidence of a crime taking place, I don't think anyone is suggesting letting people off, and I am sure the likes of Flamingo and BestWestern are not suggesting that at all.

 

[Ferret]

Always the option of a TIR if you think there's foul play occuring! I've caught one today who I suspect didn't own a current railcard at all. I'll submit a TIR, and leave it to the company to investigate further.

 

[Old Timer]

I am not sure the excess IS suitable in these instances though, as it would just encourage people to try it on (having no YPRC) and occasionally pay the extra.

The best option would be to charge for a new ticket, and politely inform the passenger that they can get a refund (less an admin charge, which might make it pointless doing so) later on. The guard can then move on quickly, without a fuss. The passenger can opt to get angry, or save face by being an adult and saying 'fair play - after all it was my fault'. Nobody on the train cares one bit..

That is all well and good but unfortunately it overlooks one major issue, in my opinion.

It is clear this site has a wideneing reputation as a place to come for fares and tickets advice. The problem with a Guard acting as you describe is that when Guards DO this, and the passenger involved comes on here to moan about it, about 1/3 of the regular posters on here immediately jump onto their own personal TOC-hate bandwagon, arguing that the Guard was wrong, or its not "customer friendly", its over-zealous, its against "OFT rules", its unfair, etc, etc. All this not only confuses but in some cases re-inforces an incorrect perception that a poster has about an issue. Look at the long-winded debate that took place over the "second lost season ticket", with all the fuss being made about unfairness although everything FGW had done had been within the rules ? Half the Forum wanted unlimited free renewals for season tickets based upon a person's word that it had been lost.

As far as I am concerned the rules are quite clear in that if you travel with a railcard then you must. If you cannot produce it, then the ticket is invalid. Its hardly rocket science and hardly something that doesn't apply elsewhere - how many loyalty cards for example require the card up front and will not allow retrograde discounts for example ?

I believe it was Flamingo who pointed out that the regulars on here should give the on-train staff more backing on the forum, they either want Guards to show discretion or they don't, the impression given and Flamingo picked up on this, is that Guards are damned on here whatever course they take.

That said TOCs also need to decide what they want, if they are happy to have a business that will lose £m in fare evasion then they should simply say so, and stop tickets checks because the present do it but dont delay the train scenario is ridiculous and just perpetuates a belief amongst fare evaders that if you cut up rough you can get away without paying, whereas if you are an honest Joe you in effect get penalised for not becoming aggressive. hardly fair now ?.

Other TOCs such as Virgin have a quite clear policy (presumable still do ?) that if you are on-board without a ticket or on a train for which the ticket is not valid then you pay the full single fare, end of, and although punters do not like it at least they are aware, and the newspapers are not full of anti-Virgin stories.

 

[CarterUSM]

As Flamingo and Old Timer have stated, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't . You can't keep everyone happy, and just have to read each situation with a clear and balanced view when they inevitably crop up. Not every member of staff even does that, but i can only speak for myself. I've been lenient , strict, and turned a blind eye in one shift before, though that was a particularly unusual day.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I just want to add my support too for those last few posts on this thread. I believe this forum is very fortunate in having (on a good day) enough intelligence and enough moderation to present a reliably and informed response to subjects raised, and as a result of those, the forum maintains the interest of those who are reliable and informed (though that too may only apply on good days!).

I enjoy some of the comments from people who think they know how it could be done better and even some of those who've already decided (eg the OP must be telling the whole truth or the OP will be too unreliably biased to tell the truth), but the strength of this forum is in its balance - the balance between opinion that is well-informed and the hard facts that are rooted in regulation that is so robust that despite being older than any living person, governs every journey by rail.
Sadly, the forum sometimes looses that balance when ill-informed interpretations or personal 'bright ideas' become mixed into the debates.

Frankly, I could never do a Guard's job, but I admire greatly those who can and do. I sometimes wish there was more admiration from others on here.

 

[Flamingo]

Thank you Dave. It's a challenging job, but overall enjoyable. It's not for the faint-hearted at times, but I hasten to add, the vast majority (99.5%) of passengers are a pleasure to work with.

We are damned if we do and damned if we don't. But most of us have broad shoulders, and managers that have common sense - although the best managers are those that have done the job, the worst are those that haven't (when it comes to dealing with complaints, anyway).

Personally, I may not go through the train charging full opens to everybody, but I also consider it remiss of me to not mention any irregularities I come across, and if I feel appropriate (and in the majority of cases I feel it is), I will charge an excess up to the cost of the type of journey that the passenger is making, along with any supplements that may be appropriate. I also make plain to the passenger what they would be liable to if a full fare was being charged.

Is this letting people off, and does it not provide enough of a deterrent? I don't know. My role is not to make a judgement on if someone is acting illegally and punish them. That is what Revenue and BTP are for, and if appropriate (and I am able to - which is not always the case) I will involve them.

However, given the reaction of passengers, I think what I do is a deterrent, and the thing to remember is that the same people travel the same lines day after day. I was told by someone with a split season ticket last week "You are the only guard that charges for this" (he should have kept his mouth shut, I charged him a full open, not an off-peak when I heard that as he obviously makes a habit of it!). Because we see the same people, and hear the same excuses from them - and it is a case of "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me". If I get the same person twice, they will not get excessed twice, and even if they say anything that leads me to believe that they are a repeat offender, then they will be informed that they had their warning, now they pay, do a UFN, or leave at the next station.

 

[island]

The FGW guard on the train I was on last night commented (complained?) to me about the number of other passengers wishing to buy on board when there were ticket-selling facilities at their departure stations, and they wished to use debit cards which the Avantix machine didn't like (not that I want to open that can of worms again). He was a lot happier with my £20 note for the weekend first upgrade.

I would have thought that dodgy cards aside, he'd be glad of the commission!

 

[Flamingo]

The FGW guard on the train I was on last night commented (complained?) to me about the number of other passengers wishing to buy on board when there were ticket-selling facilities at their departure stations, and they wished to use debit cards which the Avantix machine didn't like (not that I want to open that can of worms again). He was a lot happier with my £20 note for the weekend first upgrade.

I would have thought that dodgy cards aside, he'd be glad of the commission!

The number who use "declined" cards I think is on the increase. When they are coming from somewhere where they could have purchased them at a booking office without too much trouble, I view it with suspicion.

 

[richw]

And prepay cards without credit I've heard, didn't fgw successfully prosecute someone who was a regular user of a pre paid card without credit?

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

 

[Flamingo]

There is a few on our patch, one in particular I won't let on if I see him - and chuck off at the first stop if he sneaks past me.