Fake Ticket Inspectors? ATOC Staff Travel

[Wallsendmag]

I'd agree that court won't be first option unless there is evidence of regular evasion.

However, I have known a case go straight to court where the allegation was altering a date. The court found in TOC favour and employee iirc lost all travel facilities (not sure how long for) but pretty sure he kept his job in that case.

If it went to court i would expext a different outcome

 

[Haywain]

Yep. 'May' is the key word. Sounds to me like the staff were Jolly Decent actually, by not striking the box out. Sounds like it was a telling off. Tread carefully if you're going to take it further. I have known of staff, albeit a very long time ago, get dismissed from a company for travel irregularities in relation to Staff Travel.

Not heard of anyone being dismissed but aware of a couple of cases of people having their travel facilities withdrawn for a couple of years.

 

[RJ]

There's two things I question here:
Professional behaviour: At one point there were two RPI questioning and making jokes at my daughter's expense. She's a young woman travelling on her own. We all have our jobs to do but people should be treated with respect.

That doesn't sound especially out of the ordinary to be honest. As mentioned, these chats aren't always going to be polite and the railways do have a certain amount of tolerance for these interactions and the complaints they generate - unless evidence of it ends up on social media and causes an outrage, in which case that changes things. It is what it is.

If anyone is being discourteous or unprofessional, that's usually corrected by taking out a camera and recording the incident. For what it's worth I don't agree with the idea of staff mocking a passenger who has fallen foul of the rules, whatever demographic they belong to. I was still polite whilst forthright with people in my revenue protection days even when enforcing the rules. You never know who's watching.

 

[scrapy]

If anyone is being discourteous or unprofessional, that's usually corrected by taking out a camera and recording the incident. For what it's worth I don't agree with the idea of staff mocking a passenger who has fallen foul of the rules, whatever demographic they belong to. I was still polite whilst forthright with people in my revenue protection days even when enforcing the rules. You never know who's watching.

Taking out a camera may however antagonise someone who was just planning on giving a ticking off and using discretion to following procedure to the letter and possibly issuing a penalty fare or filling out a TIR.

 

[185]

Post 1

....didn’t put an X through the date box but made her fill the one she was going to use...

Post 2

...she’s just phoned me and told me they didn't ask her to fill in the box...

My opinion. Could be one of two things in this.

#1 Perhaps, the dependent has changed their recollection of events. 'Misremembering' could indicate the dependant has not given the full story.

Or

#2 Perhaps, the dependent's response to them caused a change in how the RPIs chose to deal with the matter which would explain how A - discretion went to B, a travel irregularity.

Personally, if this were me, I would be in touch with Chiltern prosecutions, apologising sincerely with a view to preventing the withdrawal of my own, and potentially all my other family members contractual benefits. The next step would be to hide the offending boxes pass somewhere under the creosote tin in the garden shed for family days out only, as punishment.

 

[philthetube]

If you are really upset about this I suggest they you write and complain to Chiltern, providing times, dates and a description of the staff involved, if you do many of us would be interested in the results.

 

[theironroad]

If you are really upset about this I suggest they you write and complain to Chiltern, providing times, dates and a description of the staff involved, if you do many of us would be interested in the results.

Tbh, I doubt we will hear from the OP again about the matter.

 

[CyrusWuff]

Chiltern's revenue staff have body worn cameras, so it could be worth submitting a Subject Access Request under the GDPR for any footage that may exist of the incident, though time is of the essence as it will almost certainly be erased after a given period of time if they don't intend to use it to support a prosecution.

And regarding the question of the Inspector's "T" number, that's the prefix Chiltern's Penalty Fare Notices use (Source: https://www.ircas.co.uk/MakePayment and click on the Chiltern logo), so it's reasonable to assume their revenue staff IDs start with a T as well.

 

[RJ]

Taking out a camera may however antagonise someone who was just planning on giving a ticking off and using discretion to following procedure to the letter and possibly issuing a penalty fare or filling out a TIR.

There'll always be multiple schools of thought on these things. Some people will bite their lip if being mocked in an attempt to evade trouble. Others will take exception to it. Sometimes a "ticking off" can cross the line if inappropriate and irrelevant comments are also made.

One thing that's possibly not a good idea is to come on a forum with a second hand story that nobody can verify. If something untoward happened, the way to deal with it is to communicate it to the TOC, with evidence and see what they have to say about it. Whilst I am not an advocate of unprofessional conduct towards passengers, I wonder if the benefits of doing that outweigh those of showing sympathy to the passenger concerned and advising them to remember to date their box in future. Having worked for the railways for a few years now, I don't think dependants who fail to use their facilities correctly are looked on particularly favourably so they did well to only be asked to fill in a box.

 

[philthetube]

If a dependent of mine misused a priv I would think seriously about if I could trust them with it again, if not then it would be ripped up. Too much to lose.

 

[Steam Man]

As someone who deals with these issues I can say what they RPI'S is correct, other than the alleged discourteous behaviour, but again, this is one side of the story, I'm not sure whether Chiltern RPI'S have body worn video cameras or not? We do and a customer can request any footage that they may be in.

The only thing the RPI'S should have done, but didn't, was withdraw the staff travel pass and issue a receipt for it, unless they took a picture to submit as evidence?

Normally in these circumstances the dependent will face any consequences regarding their staff travel and not the employee, even though RDG can take action if they wish so its by no means a given.

I'm not qualified to give legal advice but by the looks of it there is a clear irregularity, if an out of court/not getting RDG involved settlement is offered I'd snap their hand off for it!

this is the reason why I won’t use staff travel or a travel warrant issued by the company I will pay the full fare even if I’m an employee because I don’t want to get penalised for using it by Revenue Protection.

 

[221129]

this is the reason why I won’t use staff travel or a travel warrant issued by the company I will pay the full fare even if I’m an employee because I don’t want to get penalised for using it.

More fool you. The only people that get penalised are the ones that do wrong.

 

[robbeech]

More fool you. The only people that get penalised are the ones that do wrong.

In this scenario yes.

 

[Wallsendmag]

this is the reason why I won’t use staff travel or a travel warrant issued by the company I will pay the full fare even if I’m an employee because I don’t want to get penalised for using it by Revenue Protection.

I take it that you pay the Anytime fare in case you get on a restricted train?

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

It's totally unacceptable for a member of staff to drive someone to tears or to a panic attack. Telling off or not, and regardless of if she was in the wrong or not.

I have some sympathy here because while most guards and ticket inspectors are brilliant, there's a minority who seem to enjoy being firm or unpleasant, and at times it can be quite intimidating.

The OP doesn't deny that their daughter made a mistake. The point of this thread is that the inspectors allegedly acted in an improper way. If so then it should be reported to the operator, and there shouldn't be any retaliation against his daughter for raising these concerns.

 

[185]

It's totally unacceptable for a member of staff to drive someone to tears or to a panic attack. Telling off or not, and regardless of if she was in the wrong or not.

I have some sympathy here because while most guards and ticket inspectors are brilliant, there's a minority who seem to enjoy being firm or unpleasant, and at times it can be quite intimidating.

The OP doesn't deny that their daughter made a mistake. The point of this thread is that the inspectors allegedly acted in an improper way. If so then it should be reported to the operator, and there shouldn't be any retaliation against his daughter for raising these concerns.

Perhaps taking that approach would, if you were the member of staff, increase the likelihood of further action being taken, loss of facilities, disciplinary action and / or prosecution of the dependant pass holder. But there might be a shiny letter apologising for the upset / hurt feelings and / or inconvenience stapled to the back of it. The facts are rather clear - the passenger's actions resulted in a travel irregularity, and regardless of any upset, hurt feelings, tears - the process of completing a report of the irregularity was, from the facts stated by the OP, completed.

Going on the offensive making probably unprovable allegations against the staff after such a travel irregularity would in my opinion be a foolish mistake.

 

[PupCuff]

It's totally unacceptable for a member of staff to drive someone to tears or to a panic attack. Telling off or not, and regardless of if she was in the wrong or not.

The problem is that not all cases of someone having a panic attack or bursting out crying rely on them being 'driven' to it. Looking at it from the sorts of things I'd be more likely to deal with rather than in a revenue protection context, if I tell someone they've done something wrong (breaking safety rules, not complying with legal requirements etc) and then without provocation they just burst out in tears (perhaps they'd had a really really rubbish day already or they're having problems at home or something) then obviously I'm going to want to sit with them, offer them a tissue or make them a drink or whatever, and make sure they're okay but equally that doesn't change the fact they need to know that the course of action they are currently taking is not the right one.

You're not wrong in saying that staff shouldn't be pushing people into such emotional situations (and I have no doubt that a tiny minority of staff do) but sometimes the simple action of delivering bad news, even if this is in the nicest way possible, could be, as they say, the straw that breaks the camel's back, and that is something that you don't have any control over.

 

[LowLevel]

It's totally unacceptable for a member of staff to drive someone to tears or to a panic attack. Telling off or not, and regardless of if she was in the wrong or not.

I have some sympathy here because while most guards and ticket inspectors are brilliant, there's a minority who seem to enjoy being firm or unpleasant, and at times it can be quite intimidating.

The OP doesn't deny that their daughter made a mistake. The point of this thread is that the inspectors allegedly acted in an improper way. If so then it should be reported to the operator, and there shouldn't be any retaliation against his daughter for raising these concerns.

You can be as nice as pie with someone but not give them what they want and still watch them turn on the tears. There is never any particular need to be nasty about it but just because someone starts crying or whatever doesn't mean that they should receive differing treatment.

Someone having an awful day can be stoic or in a right state and I take the circumstances into account when making decisions rather than the demeanour of the individual.

If someone hasn't got their railcard and half way through the conversation bursts into tears, I'm still going to be selling them a new ticket.

Classic example - a chap I see regularly who always has a ticket one morning didn't have one from a penalty fare stop but looking a bit more haggard than usual. I started as I always do by asking him if there was a reason he had boarded without paying. He said he was sorry, his mind was on other things as his daughter hadn't come home the previous evening and he was going mad with worry. I sold him a normal ticket and said I hoped all would turn out OK. I saw him again a few days later (with ticket) and asked if all was OK and he replied that yes, she had come home a day later and thanked me for my kindness and for remembering him.

On the other hand I had a regular traveller who was in the habit of getting on at a manned station, walked past the booking office and ticket machines, jumping on a train and "going to sleep" before getting off at an unmanned station. If you woke her up she would pay but insisted on a railcard discount etc, if you wouldn't give it her she would just refuse to cough up and get off. One day I "woke her up" before the train had left the origin and sold her an anytime single. She screamed blue murder, burst into tears, said I was picking on her etc etc and tweeted into the company saying I was bullying her.

So please don't judge the inspector by the passenger's reaction. There are some unpleasant, calculating people about.

 

[Efini92]

However, they are far more likely to end up in the disciplinary process with potential penalties rather more severe than in court.

The last 2 I can remember that were disciplined for it were dismissed.

 

[theironroad]

this is the reason why I won’t use staff travel or a travel warrant issued by the company I will pay the full fare even if I’m an employee because I don’t want to get penalised for using it by Revenue Protection.

Really?

I know there are people who very rarely use their staff travel in any form because they don't want to spend anymore time on a train than they have to but as long as you play by the rules then staff travel is a great facility. I've so far never had any issues I can recall in 20+ years using them.

 

[father_jack]

You can be as nice as pie with someone but not give them what they want and still watch them turn on the tears. There is never any particular need to be nasty about it but just because someone starts crying or whatever doesn't mean that they should receive differing treatment.

Someone having an awful day can be stoic or in a right state and I take the circumstances into account when making decisions rather than the demeanour of the individual.

If someone hasn't got their railcard and half way through the conversation bursts into tears, I'm still going to be selling them a new ticket.

Classic example - a chap I see regularly who always has a ticket one morning didn't have one from a penalty fare stop but looking a bit more haggard than usual. I started as I always do by asking him if there was a reason he had boarded without paying. He said he was sorry, his mind was on other things as his daughter hadn't come home the previous evening and he was going mad with worry. I sold him a normal ticket and said I hoped all would turn out OK. I saw him again a few days later (with ticket) and asked if all was OK and he replied that yes, she had come home a day later and thanked me for my kindness and for remembering him.

On the other hand I had a regular traveller who was in the habit of getting on at a manned station, walked past the booking office and ticket machines, jumping on a train and "going to sleep" before getting off at an unmanned station. If you woke her up she would pay but insisted on a railcard discount etc, if you wouldn't give it her she would just refuse to cough up and get off. One day I "woke her up" before the train had left the origin and sold her an anytime single. She screamed blue murder, burst into tears, said I was picking on her etc etc and tweeted into the company saying I was bullying her.

So please don't judge the inspector by the passenger's reaction. There are some unpleasant, calculating people about.

LL your post rings oh so true !!!

Had a passenger a while back looking to refund an SDS (nearly a three figure amount), they'd been sold it for not being able to support an Advance with a railcard that they couldn't show to the RPI. To get a SDS they'd have had to have assured the RPI they had an in date one......

They'd just got off the train and were immediately applying for the refund, they'd "found" the railcard, a digital one that expired 364 days from that day !!! Father Jack didn't exactly come down in the last shower so the question was asked did they just buy the railcard after they were chinged up ? No was the answer, this digital railcard was a 3 year one and it's a coincidence that it expired a year minus a day from today !!! However I spied with my little eye an RPI, the one who'd got off the same train !!! The new TTK Avocet on train sales system will scan a railcard or ticket and show the purchase time and date.....

But how unfortunate- the mobile phone with the railcard on it ran out of battery (was turned off) just at that moment when the RPI came over. And a panic attack/hypo occurred, PCSOs and first aiders attended. Myself and the RPI were nasty nasty men, passengers (we had them back then) were enlisted as supporters. A taxi was ordered on the company tab to take this victim of the railway home....

But after the drama died down the cleaner came along saying they'd found a purse on the counter, belonging to who would you guess ? Containing an out of date railcard from the previous month, driving licence, £2.93 in small change, receipts and bank cards.

Next day dad of the loser comes to collect the lost property and to generally have a go.

He wasn't banking on being told the truth, the offspring had made him drive miles for £2.93 and a driving licence, the bank cards were destroyed as per cash regulations and the person was trying to commit fraud by trying on a dodgy refund. After digesting the story his words were that he'll kill them when he got home. He had transferred them first of all the ticket money while they were on the train and then £30 more to buy the railcard.

Drama is rarely relative to the facts.

 

[greyman42]

this is the reason why I won’t use staff travel or a travel warrant issued by the company I will pay the full fare even if I’m an employee because I don’t want to get penalised for using it by Revenue Protection.

Why would you get penalised for using your staff travel?

 

[Haywain]

The idea of not using your staff travel card is weird enough, but refusing to use a travel warrant issued by the company is even more bizarre!

 

[RPI]

The idea of not using your staff travel card is weird enough, but refusing to use a travel warrant issued by the company is even more bizarre!

I'm glad everyone else is as perplexed as I am, I thought I was missing something glaringly obvious from the original post but I really wasn't!

 

[RJ]

this is the reason why I won’t use staff travel or a travel warrant issued by the company I will pay the full fare even if I’m an employee because I don’t want to get penalised for using it by Revenue Protection.

That's more than a little irrational, but it's nobody's loss really. Crack on!

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

Perhaps taking that approach would, if you were the member of staff, increase the likelihood of further action being taken, loss of facilities, disciplinary action and / or prosecution of the dependant pass holder. But there might be a shiny letter apologising for the upset / hurt feelings and / or inconvenience stapled to the back of it. The facts are rather clear - the passenger's actions resulted in a travel irregularity, and regardless of any upset, hurt feelings, tears - the process of completing a report of the irregularity was, from the facts stated by the OP, completed.

Going on the offensive making probably unprovable allegations against the staff after such a travel irregularity would in my opinion be a foolish mistake.

So long as it's not a malicious complaint, raising it should not raise the likelihood of the company disciplining the employee. Company retaliation against employees raising complaints is about as unprofessional as it gets, and the sort of thing that if left unchecked can lead to employment tribunals.

This doesn't excuse the OP from having to take responsibility for his daughter's mistake. But there's no indication that he wasn't going to deal with that too.

Two wrongs don't make a right. A travel irregularity doesn't give a ticket inspector the right to act in an unacceptable way to a passenger, if that is indeed what happened. It is entirely possible that both sides are in the wrong here.

You're not wrong in saying that staff shouldn't be pushing people into such emotional situations (and I have no doubt that a tiny minority of staff do) but sometimes the simple action of delivering bad news, even if this is in the nicest way possible, could be, as they say, the straw that breaks the camel's back, and that is something that you don't have any control over.

Yeah I agree entirely. To be clear I was referring to staff intentionally pushing people that way. The encounter described by the OP (unprofessional, mocking, aggressive etc) reminds me of a pretty unpleasant encounter I had with a guard not so long ago. It does happen.

I think the fact that we have a member of railway staff questioning whether the ticket inspectors were actually railway staff says a lot about the (lack of) professionalism here.

 

[najaB]

It's totally unacceptable for a member of staff to drive someone to tears or to a panic attack. Telling off or not, and regardless of if she was in the wrong or not.

By the same token, some people (and I'm not saying this applies to the OP's daughter) will go to tears at the slightest provocation.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

By the same token, some people (and I'm not saying this applies to the OP's daughter) will go to tears at the slightest provocation.

I'm guessing you didn't read my last reply?

 

[packermac]

Taking out a camera may however antagonise someone who was just planning on giving a ticking off and using discretion to following procedure to the letter and possibly issuing a penalty fare or filling out a TIR.

Question as I have thought if I would do this if I saw someone being what I thought was badly treated. Are you technically allowed to film on a train (I know many have loaded stuff on Twitter, but various airlines now say in their T & C's filming onboard is not allowed, what is the TOC position, or I guess now the Governments?

 

[RPI]

Question as I have thought if I would do this if I saw someone being what I thought was badly treated. Are you technically allowed to film on a train (I know many have loaded stuff on Twitter, but various airlines now say in their T & C's filming onboard is not allowed, what is the TOC position, or I guess now the Governments?

No its not illegal to film on a train as it is a "public place", potential issue would arise with what that footage is then used for, ie if plastered over social media etc