Complaints about Revenue Protection behaviour

[jamiearmley]

If we take the reports here at face value and RPIs are doing this, I humbly suggest that as ever, they are the few bad apples where the authority has gone to their heads. We know this happens in this role, as it does in pretty much every role where you give someone any degree of authority over the "public". I suggest that they haven't been asked to do this, and if their superiors knew they were doing it, they would take a dim view.

Absolutely agree.

However, I feel bound to point out that we cannot take ANY report on this section of the forum at face value.

I can tell you that on the odd occasion : I think 3 times? : where I have been the staff member involved in a report, the general gist was correct but tempered, shall we say, by a desire on the part of the poster not to look like an idiot. (Happily, though, I've never been slated during such posts, and was once even described as 'a really nice guy'.)

 

[ChewChewTrain]

Absolutely agree.

However, I feel bound to point out that we cannot take ANY report on this section of the forum at face value.

I can tell you that on the odd occasion : I think 3 times? : where I have been the staff member involved in a report, the general gist was correct but tempered, shall we say, by a desire on the part of the poster not to look like an idiot. (Happily, though, I've never been slated during such posts, and was once even described as 'a really nice guy'.)

Just to be clear, there have been multiple occasions where posters have sought help on here in connection with an incident, and you recognised from their description of the incident that you were the staff member they interacted with, despite their description being somewhat embellished?

I appreciate you sharing that interesting information. I suppose it’s not really as surprising a “coincidence” as one might think that you would come across such accounts on here.

 

[jamiearmley]

Just to be clear, there have been multiple occasions where posters have sought help on here in connection with an incident, and you recognised from their description of the incident that you were the staff member they interacted with, despite their description being somewhat embellished?

I appreciate you sharing that interesting information. I suppose it’s not really as surprising a “coincidence” as one might think that you would come across such accounts on here.

3 occasions that I have come across, yes, where I recognised the posters account to be that of an incident I dealt with by way of submitting a travel incident report for further investigation.

I suppose, as well, that it's an example of when being too open can allow a post to be matched to an incident : especially given the oft mentioned belief by some posters that TOC investigators peruse these forums.

 

[island]

To return to the original point, I think many posters make allegations or suggestions that an officer of the railway has misbehaved towards them due to a misunderstanding that this alleged misbehaviour "cancels out" their ticketing offence or entitles them to compensation or to be dealt with less stringently.

 

[Bungle158]

To return to the original point, I think many posters make allegations or suggestions that an officer of the railway has misbehaved towards them due to a misunderstanding that this alleged misbehaviour "cancels out" their ticketing offence or entitles them to compensation or to be dealt with less stringently.

Yes, totally!

As a TM, l once sold a full walk up fare to a certain female MP from Devon. She was incensed, but had boarded at Newton Abbot, without ticket at 9 AM on a weekday.

I was "rude, overbearing and unpleasant"

Luckily management backed me, but the sense of entitlement out there is often staggeringly huge.

 

[Gloster]

I am afraid that I take most of these complaints about RPIs and other ticket inspecting staff with a large bowl of salt. Yes, I am sure that there are some members whose behaviour falls below the level one expects, or at least used to expect, but I am afraid that all too often the fault lies mainly or entirely with the passenger. Either they are trying to get let off when they have unquestionably broken the law on the basis that, as mentioned above, the allegation that the member of staff was rude to them cancels out their attempt to get away without paying the fare due. Or they genuinely believe that the member of staff has been rude to them when trying to get them to pay attention when explaining why they need to pay, or by refusing to accept their feeble excuses for not having their ticket, or…

And before anyone says it, I am not blaming the passenger: I am blaming the passenger who hasn’t paid their fare and is freeloading. There is a difference.

 

[fandroid]

Yes, totally!

As a TM, l once sold a full walk up fare to a certain female MP from Devon. She was incensed, but had boarded at Newton Abbot, without ticket at 9 AM on a weekday.

I was "rude, overbearing and unpleasant"

Luckily management backed me, but the sense of entitlement out there is often staggeringly huge.

Her reported behaviour seems totally pointless, as she would normally have been entitled to claim travel expenses anyway.

 

[Llanigraham]

Her reported behaviour seems totally pointless, as she would normally have been entitled to claim travel expenses anyway.

I think they can only claim for travel whilst they are undertaking constituency matters or to and from the House, but not for leisure purposes.

 

[Papyrus]

I think they can only claim for travel whilst they are undertaking constituency matters or to and from the House, but not for leisure purposes.

Love the idea that an MP would ever classify an expensive train journey from their constituency to London as being for ‘leisure purposes’!

 

[Haywain]

Love the idea that an MP would ever classify an expensive train journey from their constituency to London as being for ‘leisure purposes’!

Is that the only journey an MP would make?

 

[js1000]

Under the NCoT a phone or tablet is defined as a Ticket where used as such, and there is also a requirement to hand a Ticket over if asked. So setting aside the "snatching" point, there is an obligation to hand over your device if asked to.

18.1 You must show and, if asked to do so by the staff of a Train Company, hand over for inspection your Ticket and any Railcard, photocard or other form of personal identification which your Ticket requires.

“Ticket” means any physical or electronic document or record which entitles a passenger to make a journey on the National Rail Network between the stations or within the zones indicated by one or more of the Train Companies. An electronic document or record may consist of (but not be limited to): a Smartcard (including an Oyster or ITSO card); a payment card or identity card; a mobile telephone or tablet device; other mobile electronic device; or

No there is no obligation to hand over your device. You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[superkopite]

No there is no obligation to hand over your device. You don't know what you are talking about.

Are TOC employees insured to handle my £1500 mobile phone and any damages that might insue from them dropping it.

 

[Brissle Girl]

No there is no obligation to hand over your device. You don't know what you are talking about.

Summarising the para quoted:-

You must hand over if requested for inspection your “ticket”

“Ticket” means any physical or electronic document

An electronic document may consist of a mobile telephone.

So I would contend that you are obliged to, whether or not that happens in practice.

There is also an explicit clause that says you can retain a physical ticket but not a mobile telephone, which suggests that the precise wording has been considered. So it is only a requirement to hand over for inspection, not retain.

You might say I don’t know what I’m talking about (always nice to keep things polite) but refute my argument on the wording, not what happens in practice.

 

[Falcon1200]

Given the size of mobile phone screens is it not reasonable that a revenue inspector might need to hold it themselves, close to their face, to be able to properly read the ticket; And reasonable that passengers should understand that requirement, as a result of the convenience of having their ticket on their phone?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

So I would contend that you are obliged to, whether or not that happens in practice.

The NRCoT claims you are obliged to. Not quite the same.

Terms of use of reading this post: By reading this, you agree to sacrifice your first-born to Doctor Fegg at the earliest opportunity.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Given the size of mobile phone screens is it not reasonable that a revenue inspector might need to hold it themselves, close to their face, to be able to properly read the ticket; And reasonable that passengers should understand that requirement, as a result of the convenience of having their ticket on their phone?

Yes, that’s exactly the point.

 

[Deafdoggie]

The NRCoT claims you are obliged to.

The NRCoT claims TOCs shouldn't leave you stranded overnight due to their failings. But sometimes they do!

 

[Bluejays]

Given the size of mobile phone screens is it not reasonable that a revenue inspector might need to hold it themselves, close to their face, to be able to properly read the ticket; And reasonable that passengers should understand that requirement, as a result of the convenience of having their ticket on their phone?

After you've scanned a ticket all the relevant details should be visible on your own phone.

Agree about the small size of some of the writing mind, I don't think I'll be able to delay my trip to Specsavers for much longer !

 

[Hadders]

Given the size of mobile phone screens is it not reasonable that a revenue inspector might need to hold it themselves, close to their face, to be able to properly read the ticket; And reasonable that passengers should understand that requirement, as a result of the convenience of having their ticket on their phone?

Rail staff should not touch passengers phones. If necessary they should take a photo of an e-ticket using their company issued phone.

 

[Haywain]

Rail staff should not touch passengers phones. If necessary they should take a photo of an e-ticket using their company issued phone.

I'm not sure I would see it as unreasonable to just scroll the screen to see the details of an eTicket, while the owner is holding the phone.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I'm not sure I would see it as unreasonable to just scroll the screen to see the details of an eTicket, while the owner is holding the phone.

And as I’ve noted, the NCoT specifically requires passengers to hand it over for inspection if requested (but not to be retained in the event of any irregularity, unlike for paper tickets).

 

[Hadders]

And as I’ve noted, the NCoT specifically requires passengers to hand it over for inspection if requested (but not to be retained in the event of any irregularity, unlike for paper tickets).

The NRCoT really needs to be clarified but there are all sorts of implications from a GDPR point of view if rail staff take possession of customers phones to inspect tickets.

 

[island]

The NRCoT really needs to be clarified

It does.

but there are all sorts of implications from a GDPR point of view if rail staff take possession of customers phones to inspect tickets.

Not really. GDPR only applies to data stored by the TOC digitally or in a paper filing system. Data viewed by a member of staff are not in scope. There are other issues with staff poking through passengers’ phones, but GDPR isn’t one of them.

 

[Hadders]

It does.

Not really. GDPR only applies to data stored by the TOC digitally or in a paper filing system. Data viewed by a member of staff are not in scope. There are other issues with staff poking through passengers’ phones, but GDPR isn’t one of them.

Ok, not GDPR but how long before there are complaints about a guard looking at a passengers contact details, photos, Facebook etc.

Railway staff should not be handling passengers personal devices.

At my work customers sometimes have to show barcodes they have been sent to gain access to special offer discounts etc. staff are told that under no circumstances should they touch a customer’s phone. I hope similar instructions have been given to railway staff.

 

[Wolfie]

Ok, not GDPR but how long before there are complaints about a guard looking at a passengers contact details, photos, Facebook etc.

Railway staff should not be handling passengers personal devices.

At my work customers sometimes have to show barcodes they have been sent to gain access to special offer discounts etc. staff are told that under no circumstances should they touch a customer’s phone. I hope similar instructions have been given to railway staff.

The Home Office lost litigation for exploiting migrants phones.....

 

[nanstallon]

Yes, totally!

As a TM, l once sold a full walk up fare to a certain female MP from Devon. She was incensed, but had boarded at Newton Abbot, without ticket at 9 AM on a weekday.

I was "rude, overbearing and unpleasant"

Luckily management backed me, but the sense of entitlement out there is often staggeringly huge.

'Don't you know who I am?' I thought that MPs got free first class travel. Not that they should!

 

[Chrius56000]

I use both paper tickets and electronic tickets, and when the Train Conductor comes walking along I bring up the ticket ready for them and then whilst they're there I offer them my S.C. Railcard, some just nod without checking my S.C.R. if they're busy, but I always ask "if you hang on a few seconds I can show you my Railcard as well !" – if I've got a table seat I place it on the table for them and have no quibble with them picking it up to check – I try not to make mistakes with ticket validities, and 99 times out of 100 they'll pick it up, take a quick glance and put it back with "Thank you Sir!"

Chris Williams

 

[rs101]

I'm not sure I would see it as unreasonable to just scroll the screen to see the details of an eTicket, while the owner is holding the phone.

if I can get the Eurostar from London to Paris, train from Paris to Geneva, use local trains throughout Switzerland, attend a 2 day music festival, then fly back to London City, all using eTickets and apps on my phone without anyone else needing to touch it, I can't see a reason why a ticket inspector on the train from London back to Essex needs to handle it to check a ticket.

Screen shot of my most recent eTicket. No need to scroll to see anything and easily scannable.

 

[CharlieSpotted]

Quite. I find the discussion about "the size of phones" meaning that inspectors have to handle them to see them properly bizarre too. Phones are bigger than ever and have incredible, large, bright, high-resolution screens - the screens are a huge selling point on modern devices and as such companies have been competing for years to make them better and better, and as a result the technology is now very mature indeed. Your example of your ticket on you phone is, I guarantee it, considerably easier to see and read than a paper ticket.

 

[3rd rail land]

Any ticket I have ever had on my phone has had a barcode which the person checking tickets simply scans and as a result has all the information they need on their handheld device without ever needing to touch my phone.
All I have to do is ensure the screen is bright enough for them to be able to scan the barcode.