I have a Scottish blind persons concession card and I understand from the Edinburgh trams website that this is valid on trams. This was confirmed by staff at the stop who assisted me in validating my pass. However the conductor on the tram stated that as my card was not issued by Edinburgh city council, it is not valid and insisted that I had to pay a £10 on the spot fine. Having paid in protest, I wondered if anybody on here knows the appeals process as the fine just looks like a ticket. I have already phoned the trams number but the person I spoke to agreed with the conductors stance. What should I do?
-
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!
Edinburgh trams 'fine' (known as "standard fare")
- Thread starter railboy
- 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
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Did the £10 additional charge come with a printed serial number? Was it Penalty Number 000000001 by any chance?
It could become a collector's item quite soon!
Seriously, I'm very suprised that a Penalty would have been issued on day one, even if the passenger was at fault, but as far as I can ascertain from Edinburgh Trams' website, railboy's travel using a Scottish Blind Person's Consessionary Travel card was entirely valid.
It could become a collector's item quite soon!
Seriously, I'm very suprised that a Penalty would have been issued on day one, even if the passenger was at fault, but as far as I can ascertain from Edinburgh Trams' website, railboy's travel using a Scottish Blind Person's Consessionary Travel card was entirely valid.
I would however, point out that, on the subject of Concessionary travel the Conditions of Carriage only states:
So either their CoC have been poorly drafted, or the website is making 'advertising claims' not backed up in the terms, and/or staff have been incorrectly briefed on the terms.
In any of these cases I think there are 2 options; make a direct complaint to [email protected] (which could well result in the CoC being taken as correct) or take the matter to the press (which would seem to be much more likely to result in the entitlement being retained).
So either their CoC have been poorly drafted, or the website is making 'advertising claims' not backed up in the terms, and/or staff have been incorrectly briefed on the terms.
In any of these cases I think there are 2 options; make a direct complaint to [email protected] (which could well result in the CoC being taken as correct) or take the matter to the press (which would seem to be much more likely to result in the entitlement being retained).
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
I agree that the wording is poor, and that the Edinburgh Trams' website could be construed as 'advertising', but it does go a little further:
The page which bb21 linked to includes an image of a Scottish National Entitlement Card being 'validated' under the heading "How to Travel for Free" and the text under that image includes : "place your valid Scottish National Entitlement Card on the platform validator."
Additionally, there is a widely quoted claim by Edinburgh's Transport convener Councillor Lesley Hinds said: "We are determined that Edinburgh residents who are eligible for free travel across the country should be able to use the tram on the same basis . . . " along with the editorial opening: "The announcement confirms that those over 60 and disabled travellers who live in the capital would travel on the trams for free." (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-21365422).
Last edited:
It didn't have a penalty number, it just looks exactly the same as a normal ticket but says "Edinburgh Trams Standard Fare" on it. Nothing seems to indicate if its the first penalty fare or not.
Was your National Entitlement Card touched on the reader?
Either way, I don't see it matters, as operators cannot expect blind people to be able to find validators etc.
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,151
I don't normally recommend this, and it will probably end up causing more trouble to you you that it is worth; and they might want to take your photo etc; which could even mean you end up being targetted; but you could also try your local paper who might be interested in the story if they got it wrong ... ...
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
I wouldn't normally ever suggest this, but I'm sure the newspapers in Edinburgh would be VERY interested in this story...
GaryMcEwan
Established Member
I'm sure the TV Media would be very interested in this as well. If the OP want's to get in touch, I can give him details on how to get in touch with a few journo's that might pick up the story...
It must surely depend on what the OP wants out of this?
If it's an apology, he can surely get this from the company without having to go to the press.
If it's an assurance that it won't happen again, the same.
If the problem persists and happens again, then by all means go to the press as the company obviously isn't taking the problem seriously and training staff as required.
If it's an apology, he can surely get this from the company without having to go to the press.
If it's an assurance that it won't happen again, the same.
If the problem persists and happens again, then by all means go to the press as the company obviously isn't taking the problem seriously and training staff as required.
I'd suggest printing a copy of this page: http://edinburghtrams.com/tickets/scottish-concession-cards with the URL, date and time in the header/footer in case they update it.
I have taken legal advice on the matter specifically highlighting the discrepancy between the website and the conditions of carriage as highlighted by this forum (which I was not aware of previously) and I have been told that there are two possible outcomes:
1. That I was incorrectly fined which could be construed as negligence especially on the basis that the negligence caused me financial loss and distress.
2. That I was correctly fined in principle (on the basis that those concession cards aren't valid) but there would be a breach of the Trade Descriptions Act (a criminal offence prosecuted by Trading Standards) as well as many possible breaches of consumer protection law for misleading information etc
Ive also been advised that in any case, there is a reasonable adjustments duty under equality legislation that would apply to difficulties of registered blind people in using card validation readers before getting on a tram, and issuing a fine under the circumstances would definitely count as discrimination. I've also spoken to RNIB and they've told me I'm not the first person to point out this problem about the trams but they were stunned to hear I was actually fined.
As for the press, I think this would have been a good idea if I lived in Edinburgh or at least very nearby but as I live further away I feel this would make it difficult. I appreciate that given the fact the trams only started this weekend, it would be more prudent to give them a chance to respond to a letter of complaint which I posted today and see what they say and/or do about it.
1. That I was incorrectly fined which could be construed as negligence especially on the basis that the negligence caused me financial loss and distress.
2. That I was correctly fined in principle (on the basis that those concession cards aren't valid) but there would be a breach of the Trade Descriptions Act (a criminal offence prosecuted by Trading Standards) as well as many possible breaches of consumer protection law for misleading information etc
Ive also been advised that in any case, there is a reasonable adjustments duty under equality legislation that would apply to difficulties of registered blind people in using card validation readers before getting on a tram, and issuing a fine under the circumstances would definitely count as discrimination. I've also spoken to RNIB and they've told me I'm not the first person to point out this problem about the trams but they were stunned to hear I was actually fined.
As for the press, I think this would have been a good idea if I lived in Edinburgh or at least very nearby but as I live further away I feel this would make it difficult. I appreciate that given the fact the trams only started this weekend, it would be more prudent to give them a chance to respond to a letter of complaint which I posted today and see what they say and/or do about it.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
I wholly agree with your last point, that it would be prudent to give the operators the opportunity to consider the situation at an appropriate level. In fact, this opportunity should always be given, whatever the dispute.
I regret that, and I do so with some hesitation, I will have to disagree with the assumption of your legal advisor. Not only has the Trade Descriptions Act been effectively repealled (and replaced by the CPUTR), but it is far from clear that the terms of travel on Edinburgh Trams can be considered as an offer of goods or services to Consumers. I have been in no doubt about this, and the Scottish jurisdiction is immaterial in this exemption. The only elements of rail and tram travel which are captured by consumer legislation relates to advertiseing, special promotons and offers, areas which do not apply to the acceptance or otherwise of Concessionary travel cards.
Nevertheless, the City's own Trading Standards Officers should be interested in the apparent error, as should the Advertising Standards Authority (though I wouldn't expect any productive outcome from notifying the ASA).
Additionally, you must understand that this is not a 'fine' in the terms that you use the phrase. It is a 'standard fare' and represents no penalty nor presumtion of error of action or intention on your part.
I do realise that Scotland has little need for lawyers with expertise in public transport legislation and case law, but I am a little concerned that your advisor appears to have been hasty in offering the advice you have reported on here. Sorry to appear contradictory.
I regret that, and I do so with some hesitation, I will have to disagree with the assumption of your legal advisor. Not only has the Trade Descriptions Act been effectively repealled (and replaced by the CPUTR), but it is far from clear that the terms of travel on Edinburgh Trams can be considered as an offer of goods or services to Consumers. I have been in no doubt about this, and the Scottish jurisdiction is immaterial in this exemption. The only elements of rail and tram travel which are captured by consumer legislation relates to advertiseing, special promotons and offers, areas which do not apply to the acceptance or otherwise of Concessionary travel cards.
Nevertheless, the City's own Trading Standards Officers should be interested in the apparent error, as should the Advertising Standards Authority (though I wouldn't expect any productive outcome from notifying the ASA).
Additionally, you must understand that this is not a 'fine' in the terms that you use the phrase. It is a 'standard fare' and represents no penalty nor presumtion of error of action or intention on your part.
I do realise that Scotland has little need for lawyers with expertise in public transport legislation and case law, but I am a little concerned that your advisor appears to have been hasty in offering the advice you have reported on here. Sorry to appear contradictory.
Last edited:
One thing has puzzled me here and I'm surprised that nobody else has picked up on it either. When Railboy 'validated' his pass at the tramstop, surely the validator would have given some sort of indication as to whether the pass was valid or not. Surely if it said the pass wasn't valid, the member of staff at the stop who assisted him would have told him this and would have directed him to purchase a normal ticket before boarding?
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
This is immaterial.
Irregardless of whether the OP was permitted to board by the 'validator' or by oral assurance from the assiting officer, it was the on-board officer determined that it was invalid. That determination is inconsistent with my reading of the relevant regulations and with the associated remarks and publicity which appear to support that reading.
While it is frustrating to receive contradictory advice, the relavant factor is the non-acceptance of the card as authority to travel.
The advice given was from citizens advice. I can't afford "proper" advice and I have no plans to rely on what I was told. I was just curious as to what my options were and what the likely consequences were. I don't have any reason to doubt what I've been told. I should add that a friend of mine has highlighted that on twitter (which I do not use) there is a post asking if blind concession passes outside Edinburgh are valid and Edinburgh trams pointed out that yes they are. It will be interesting their response as it seems I'm not the only person with this problem.
Whilst the relevant factor is the non-acceptance of the card as authority to travel, surely this act in itself is wrong?
The correct procedure would have been to accept the ticket and not charge a standard fare.
Last edited by a moderator:
Blindtraveler
Established Member
I have not yet done the tram but after seeing this, and as I hold a rimilar card intend going out later with the Mrs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
didnt go tonight due to some daft boyband playing Murryfield but rest assured am going, soon!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
didnt go tonight due to some daft boyband playing Murryfield but rest assured am going, soon!
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Hmmm, when I passed, in the height of the evening rush hour, I counted a daunting number of passengers on the westbound platform (i.e. 3) and almost twice as many waiting for an eastbound (i.e. 5).
Impressive stats for the evening peak, eh?
It's not really surprised me that an issue like this has come up in the first week of the trams operating. I have nothing but sympathy for the OP and expect he will get nothing short of an apology and refund for his embarrassing experience.
In defence of the staff involved, the Scottish national entitlement cards can at first be quite daunting and confusing to inexperienced or poorly trained staff. With Young Scot, disabled, blind and OAP's all having variations of the same card and all with different fares, restrictions and area entitlements it can be very easy to make a mistake. In this case it would appear that the onboard staff either missed the eye logo in the corner of the card and believed it to be a bog standard concession card or that they believed only Edinburgh council blind cards were valid. The latter certainly raising a possible training issue for Edinburgh trams.
Either way it will be a good thing that this has been raised at an early stage and the OP has done the right thing in writing to the company and giving them a chance to correct their mistake. I look forward to hearing the outcome.
In defence of the staff involved, the Scottish national entitlement cards can at first be quite daunting and confusing to inexperienced or poorly trained staff. With Young Scot, disabled, blind and OAP's all having variations of the same card and all with different fares, restrictions and area entitlements it can be very easy to make a mistake. In this case it would appear that the onboard staff either missed the eye logo in the corner of the card and believed it to be a bog standard concession card or that they believed only Edinburgh council blind cards were valid. The latter certainly raising a possible training issue for Edinburgh trams.
Either way it will be a good thing that this has been raised at an early stage and the OP has done the right thing in writing to the company and giving them a chance to correct their mistake. I look forward to hearing the outcome.
scotsman
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 3,252
railboy, could you DM me?
We could always FOI Edinburgh Trams to ask how many standard fares were issued on day 1 and the time of the first. If yours was the first, and if it can be preserved suitably, it will be worth serious money one day
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
What troubles me is not the issue of the Standard Fare- we all make mistakes- but the fact Edinburgh Trams were adamant it was correct when the OP rang them.
Not sure what this means?
I was told I had to send the "standard fare" to the address stated on the trams website. I did take a photograph of it though and I still have a card receipt as well as an entry on my bank statement showing the charge.
CallySleeper
Established Member
I think he wants you to send him a private message. Why he can't just send you one privately himself is beyond me...
krus_aragon
Established Member
Or spell "PM" (assuming that's what scotsman meant). :P I was racking my brains as to what a DM would be as well.
Last edited:
- Status