FGW at Paddington still getting evening Off Peak validity spectacularly wrong.

[najaB]

I'm also not replying to them.

I completely agree that you shouldn't reply - assuming that the address is even capable of receiving incoming mail. GWR needs to investigate, though given the apparent throwaway addresses it will be difficult for them to track down who sent them.

 

[jon0844]

These emails just show how right some people think they are.

I remember going to the nationalrail/(code) page and staff claiming that wasn't correct and their old, photocopied, paperwork superseded it!

 

[Iskra]

You really need to bring those emails to the attention of GWR as that is a serious breach of data protection on their part and one of their employees is seriously abusing their position and probably their internet/social media policy too.

Disgusting behaviour and very poor that GWR are being so callous with your email address.

 

[crehld]

This really is a disappointing development. You should certainly forward these to GWR, who I'm sure will take great interest in potentially one of their employees accessing personal data to engage in malicious communication and harassment.

For me the most upsetting thing about it is that this one individual seems intent to tar the reputation of an entire profession and risks giving good, professional and hard working rail staff a bad name.

 

[didcotdean]

An anytime return to London is cheaper than the off-peak all the way to Tonbridge if I'm correct, so that makes absolutely no sense.

An off-peak first class day return Didcot to Tonbridge (code F3) costs somewhat less than an off-peak first class day return Didcot to Paddington (code P7).

Not that the cost of the ticket has necessarily anything to do with its validity of course.

 

[bnm]

I mentioned the emails just to show that there are those who will defend the indefensible regardless.

I'm not taking them seriously. The addresses are now blocked. Proving from where and who they came from and doing anything with that proof is too long and laborious a process. Not worth the effort.

That someone has my email address is of little concern either. I've had that same address since 1999 and it, and my real world self, aren't too hard to find on the internet.

So, talk of harassment, police, ICO etc, is pointless. It's enough effort just concentrating on the matter in hand - being denied travel at a time of my choosing with a valid ticket.

The emails are just an amusing, to me, sideshow.

 

[najaB]

Disgusting behaviour and very poor that GWR are being so callous with your email address.

You can't assume that GWR are being careless. The person who accessed bnm's email address may have had a legitimate reason to do so as part of their job. Institutional data protection can only go so far and can't protect against individual employees not complying with policies.

Now we need to see if GWR conduct a thorough investigation of this breach.

 

[Dent]

As well as forwarding these emails to your contact at GWR, you should consider civil action for harassment over these emails.

 

[crehld]

I mentioned the emails just to show that there are those who will defend the indefensible regardless.

I'm not taking them seriously. The addresses are now blocked. Proving from where and who they came from and doing anything with that proof is too long and laborious a process. Not worth the effort.

That someone has my email address is of little concern either. I've had that same address since 1999 and it, and my real world self, aren't too hard to find on the internet.

So, talk of harassment, police, ICO etc, is pointless. It's enough effort just concentrating on the matter in hand - being denied travel at a time of my choosing with a valid ticket.

The emails are just an amusing, to me, sideshow.

Even so, I would still send copies of the emails to GWR as part of your on going correspondence.

 

[andrewkeith5]

Even so, I would still send copies of the emails to GWR as part of your on going correspondence.

Indeed, even if you aren't taking them seriously, you should report anything like this to GWR as you may not be the only one experiencing it. The fact that you have reported them will not stop GWR working in your case and may even support them in other internal matters.

 

[krus_aragon]

In future my opening gambit should perhaps be, " Do you know who I am?"

Wait, I know the answer to this. You're Ronnie Pickering, aren't you? :P

 

[Iskra]

You can't assume that GWR are being careless. The person who accessed bnm's email address may have had a legitimate reason to do so as part of their job. Institutional data protection can only go so far and can't protect against individual employees not complying with policies.

Now we need to see if GWR conduct a thorough investigation of this breach.

They're being careless if people who can't be trusted can access personal contact details. Why do people at gateline level need to see that email address? Only customer services or management should need the posters email address.

I receive electronic customer feedback on a daily basis, some of it is collected through automated methods some through customer services, yet still all personal details are redacted to prevent unauthorised correspondence. It's very unprofessional for someone's details to be released.

I would urge the poster to report this to GWR, even if it's just to stop it happening to somebody who is less thick-skinned and they clearly need to look at how they handle customer correspondence.

 

[richw]

I wouldn't be surprised if they are both from the same person. What's concerning is that they have access to your email address. I would raise this as part of your discussions with GWR.

You really need to bring those emails to the attention of GWR as that is a serious breach of data protection on their part and one of their employees is seriously abusing their position and probably their internet/social media policy too.

Disgusting behaviour and very poor that GWR are being so callous with your email address.

Before determining if GWR are the source of his email address being obtained, is his email address available on this forum, or any other forum where he has discussed the matter, or his real name which could make it quite easy to track him, especially if it has been hinted his local station, thus roughly where he may live?

A google of his username suggests he is on excess of 20 different forums all with the same username. Some forums I use have a button to click which generates an email to email address rather than the forum. The sender doesn't see the email address they are sending to unless the recipient replies.

 

[najaB]

Why do people at gateline level need to see that email address? Only customer services or management should need the posters email address.

That's why I said the person who accessed the email address rather than the person who sent the email. They may well not be one and the same.

 

[andrewkeith5]

Before determining if GWR are the source of his email address being obtained, is his email address available on this forum, or any other forum where he has discussed the matter, or his real name which could make it quite easy to track him, especially if it has been hinted his local station, thus roughly where he may live?

That is of course possible - however the emails contain content which suggests information obtained from 'within the circle' of the organisation e.g. Potential industrial action. They might be a joke, but it's likely that it wouldn't take too long for GWR to determine if it was.

The alternative option, of course, is that if they continue then it could be argued that they are harassment and the police be involved, but as the OP isn't that bothered about them then obviously it's up to them what to do.

 

[Agent_c]

Whilst there are certainly nonGWR explanations as to what the source might be, I'd still take them to GWR, if only to inspire them into serious action.

 

[Bletchleyite]

First one tells me to stop rocking up to the gateline with insufficient time for my ticket validity to be checked. Tells me to stop insisting on speaking to the DSM every time and tells me to stop buying tickets with F3/C4 restrictions from Didcot/Reading when I'm always travelling from further west. Also tells me to stop using those tickets when it's obvious I'm not travelling beyond London. If I don't do these things "we" (that's the word used) will continue to delay you at the gateline.

Second one tells me staff at Paddington are considering industrial action after one gateline staffer was disciplined over this matter.

It is always possible that these are being sent by someone to wind you up with no connection to anyone at Paddington gateline. But I would still bring them to GWR's attention, because if they are indeed genuine I would consider it entirely appropriate that the sender of the first one would be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct, whether that results in a strike per the second or otherwise.

 

[adc82140]

Long time lurker on this thread, but I'll dive in....

My feeling re the emails- wind up merchant. It just wouldn't be worth the risk for any employee. I have experience of trade unions (not railway/transport)- they will not defend the indefensible, they exist to make sure due process is followed with any negotiations or proceedings. It would risk the reputation of the union if they were seen to support the vicitmisation of a customer.

 

[island]

As for Paddington, I'm tempted to suggest an en masse F3/C4 forum outing.

May as well make it a GroupSave

Limehouse LTS to Didcot Parkway is a W1 I think.

 

[Wolfie]

You really need to bring those emails to the attention of GWR as that is a serious breach of data protection on their part and one of their employees is seriously abusing their position and probably their internet/social media policy too.

Disgusting behaviour and very poor that GWR are being so callous with your email address.

Absolutely. The Information Commissioner would take a VERY dim view of this. Whichever knuckle-dragging Paddington clown did this deserves dismissal, no ifs or buts. If his/her fellow knuckle draggers don't like it they can go to.. they won't be missed.

 

[PenaltyFare]

We have been lurking on this thread ever since the issues started last year.

The validity is clear and crystal clear on a public website (nationalrail.co.uk). There is a simple reason for the continuing problems.

BNM found a perfectly valid (dare we say it) loophole and the railway does not like it. It is also clear that GWR cant do anything about it as its not one of their flows.

I suspect that certain members of gateline staff are also not being correctly trained by local management despite the assurances you've been given.
How hard is it for a member of the barrier staff to get the company provided samsung phone, look up nationalrail.co.uk/XX, and then say "yep ticket is perfectly valid, sorry, then open the barriers."

 

[bnm]

BNM found a perfectly valid (dare we say it) loophole and the railway does not like it.

Dare YOU say it.

Using a ticket within its published validity, from point A to point B and return is NOT a loophole.

 

[AngusH]

Have you considered talking to your MP? or even inviting him/her to accompany you on a journey to see the problem directly.

The MP can then be seen to be doing something, especially if they are able to get changes made.

They may also be able to contact the various government departments directly in ways that you as an ordinary person probably can't. They may also be able to get the select committee to ask awkward questions in the future.

 

[RochdalePioneers]

It is if you are GWR...

 

[najaB]

It is if you are GWR...

I presume you're saying that it's a loophole ticket from GWR's point of view?

 

[bnm]

Have you considered talking to your MP? or even inviting him/her to accompany you on a journey to see the problem directly.

The MP can then be seen to be doing something, especially if they are able to get changes made.

They may also be able to contact the various government departments directly in ways that you as an ordinary person probably can't. They may also be able to get the select committee to ask awkward questions in the future.

That is in hand. As is contact with a few transport journalists. None from the national print media I hasten to add!

 

[AngusH]

That is in hand. As is contact with a few transport journalists. None from the national print media I hasten to add!

Good to hear and I wish you the best of luck with it.

Maybe it needs a new national campaign group "FairFare"?

 

[MarlowDonkey]

I presume you're saying that it's a loophole ticket from GWR's point of view?

It's the fault of GWR pricing. If you check Didcot to Tonbridge leaving after 10.00 am and returning after 4 pm the Off Peak fares are £ 37.00 Standard and £ 55.50 First Class. (17:42 or 18:00 from Paddington)

Checking Didcot to Paddington for departing 17:30 from Paddington, you get £ 25.00 Off Peak standard and £ 69.10 Off Peak First. So that's an extra £ 13.60 for less travel and a worse service, being available on fewer trains. The 17:42 is allowed, but not the 18:00.

Whilst there's a rational relationship on the Standard fares, there isn't one on First Class.

Shouldn't TOCs have a "never knowingly undersold" promise? If there's a longer journey available at a cheaper price for walk up fares, should they not reduce the higher price for the shorter journey to remove the distance anomaly? That particularly applies for journeys through London.

 

[najaB]

Shouldn't TOCs have a "never knowingly undersold" promise? If there's a longer journey available at a cheaper price for walk up fares, should they not reduce the higher price for the shorter journey to remove the distance anomaly? That particularly applies for journeys through London.

Not saying this is the case for this particular example, but such a policy would remove the TOCs ability to price people off certain trains in order deal with crowding.

 

[miami]

I presume you're saying that it's a loophole ticket from GWR's point of view?

If it's a "loophole" that only bnm and perhaps a few others are exploiting, surely it's in GWRs interest to not build a situation where that loophole gets wider coverage (perhaps in the national press). It may be "costing" them £100 a day, or £25k a year, but wider coverage may lead to it "costing" them £25k a day. Even if that wider coverage leads to the "loophole" being closed after a month, they could easily have "lost" £500k in that time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not saying this is the case for this particular example, but such a policy would remove the TOCs ability to price people off certain trains in order deal with crowding.

It's been 10 years since I commuted on that line, however the slow trains were the ones people couldn't physically get on when going through Ealing, I was left behind many times.