Had to break through unmanned barriers at Burgess hill tonight

[Hadders]

It seems like the railway cannot win when it comes to stations with multiple entrances/exits. Essentially there are four choices:

1. Close all the secondary barrier lines, have all entry and exit through one set of barriers which is staffed. Would not be popular with customers who use the now closed barriers.
2. Leave the main barrier line staffed but leave unstaffed barrier lines open. A fare dodgers paradise - people will be up in arms about fare evasion etc.
3. Staff secondary barrier lines at all times. Not feasible given the cost involved. People would be up in arms about staff 'sitting around' all day at little used barrier lines'
4. Use technology to remotely monitor secondary barrier lines. They could still be staffed at busy times, if requried.

To be honest option 4 is probably the most sensible balance between cost, revenue protection and passenger convenience.

 

[Sonic1234]

Occam's Razor — are they blocking them, or have they just not gotten Cubic to set up the gatelines correctly?

Yes, they are blocking Advance tickets. Southern confirmed this in a complaint I made to them about it. Their idea is the gate staff check you are getting the right train.

 

[Somewhere]

Yes, they are blocking Advance tickets. Southern confirmed this in a complaint I made to them about it. Their idea is the gate staff check you are getting the right train.

Realistically, staff just wave you through if you wave something at them

It seems like the railway cannot win when it comes to stations with multiple entrances/exits. Essentially there are four choices:

1. Close all the secondary barrier lines, have all entry and exit through one set of barriers which is staffed. Would not be popular with customers who use the now closed barriers.
2. Leave the main barrier line staffed but leave unstaffed barrier lines open. A fare dodgers paradise - people will be up in arms about fare evasion etc.
3. Staff secondary barrier lines at all times. Not feasible given the cost involved. People would be up in arms about staff 'sitting around' all day at little used barrier lines'
4. Use technology to remotely monitor secondary barrier lines. They could still be staffed at busy times, if requried.

To be honest option 4 is probably the most sensible balance between cost, revenue protection and passenger convenience.

Option 4, with the option of the staff moving from the main barrier to the secondary barrier at the busy time, with the ticket office monitoring the main barrier (as the main barrier tends to be the busy barrier in the morning).

 

[Sonic1234]

Realistically, staff just wave you through if you wave something at them

Which is why it's such an irritating policy. It's poor revenue protection and poor customer service. Causes delays leaving the station particularly at these unstaffed gatelines where you have to call and hope someone answers, which often they don't at Croydon.

Southern trains have on board supervisors, it should be their responsibility to check tickets.

 

[MrJeeves]

Yes, they are blocking Advance tickets. Southern confirmed this in a complaint I made to them about it. Their idea is the gate staff check you are getting the right train.

Amusing considering unless it's an advance with GTR as the main TOC, you don't actually need to get on the booked GTR train unless you're changing at Cambridge to/from GA.

 

[JonathanH]

Yes it was like this when i was at Reigate 2 years ago, the barrier wouldn't accept my rover ticket but i was let through after i showed it to the camera.

If you wait long enough not looking as if you know what you are doing, they will open the gates anyway.

Southern trains have on board supervisors, it should be their responsibility to check tickets.

It is their responsibility. That doesn't change the need for gatelines as well.

 

[Sonic1234]

It is their responsibility. That doesn't change the need for gatelines as well.

Agreed, but on most TOCs checking if you're on the right train on an Advance is the duty of on board staff. GTR set the gates to reject these tickets, the idea being the gate staff do this check (if they actually do in reality is variable).

 

[JonathanH]

GTR set the gates to reject these tickets, the idea being the gate staff do this check (if they actually do in reality is variable).

I don't really see a problem with that. There is a good case for some tickets to be seen by a human eye even if there are barriers. It would very good if passengers were told to expect the additional inspection though.

 

[Starmill]

GWR and Chiltern seem to make more effort to put up a sign that grabs the attention saying what to do if you can't get in or out at one of these gatelines. Southern has loads but they seem to assume people know what the assistance button is for i.e. the gateline mainly.

 

[Hadders]

I don't really see a problem with that. There is a good case for some tickets to be seen by a human eye even if there are barriers. It would very good if passengers were told to expect the additional inspection though.

The problem is the manual check doesn't really happen. You're just waved through, Birmingham New Street style.

 

[sheff1]

This arrangement is used all over the southern network and works fine.

The arrangement does not work fine.

I recall just the two occasions when my valid ticket was rejected at a closed unstaffed barrier on Southern. The first time I was entering, I tried contacting the alleged help but no one answered so I pushed through the wide gate as the train was arriving. The other time when I was exiting the passenger behind lent forward and opened the gate and then tailgated me through.

Closed and unstaffed barriers should not be allowed in my view if the gates can't be programmed correctly, which they seemingly can't (or can, but TOCs can't be bothered).

 

[ivorytoast28]

It seems like the railway cannot win when it comes to stations with multiple entrances/exits. Essentially there are four choices:

1. Close all the secondary barrier lines, have all entry and exit through one set of barriers which is staffed. Would not be popular with customers who use the now closed barriers.
2. Leave the main barrier line staffed but leave unstaffed barrier lines open. A fare dodgers paradise - people will be up in arms about fare evasion etc.
3. Staff secondary barrier lines at all times. Not feasible given the cost involved. People would be up in arms about staff 'sitting around' all day at little used barrier lines'
4. Use technology to remotely monitor secondary barrier lines. They could still be staffed at busy times, if requried.

To be honest option 4 is probably the most sensible balance between cost, revenue protection and passenger convenience.

When I made this post, I assumed the issue was a barrier that had been left closed with no staff, I see that now wasn't the case.

Having read all these replies, I fully agree that 4 is fine and can work and obviously it is what they were going for here. However, I do think if this is the route that companies are taking, the process needs to be clearly signposted on the gates themselves (maybe it is and there's just a lot of other clutter?). I certainly had no clue that the help point was different to the normal ones at all stations as a fairly seasoned traveller.

Or perhaps we're expected to have some knowledge of the stations we're travelling to - If I knew there was another gateline that was manned, I'd have gone to it rather than push through.

That being said most stations I've been to tend to use the 5th option of just leaving all gatelines open when they don't have the staff to cover all. It seems this issue is more prevalent to GTR due to the lack of staff on trains. While people can easily travel ticketless on thameslink to places like this, a similar distance outside of London on SWR would regularly have a guard checking tickets on board, so barriers are less important to stopping fare evasion anyway

 

[FenMan]

I don't really see a problem with that. There is a good case for some tickets to be seen by a human eye even if there are barriers. It would very good if passengers were told to expect the additional inspection though.

I agree about the good case, in theory.

But that would be assuming all station staff diligently carry out their duties 100% of the time (erm, no they don't, they are human, not robots - I've been held up at remote gates before), while the quality of the camera would have to be sufficiently good for staff to spot any tickets that need a further, and necessarily delayed, manual inspection while hoping the passengers concerned don't just get frustrated, force the gates and are long gone before any inspection is possible..

Surely a classic case of a bean counter's easy low cost solution vs how human beings actually behave?

 

[vinnym70]

There's a lot at stake here. It's fine if you're able-bodied, have a regular ticket and the gates open for you.
If you don't have a run-of-the-mill ticket then you may need assistance just based on your ticket type.
Should someone who's never been to that station before know how to summon assistance?

What if that person is neurodivergent or has a disability that prevents them from engaging with the (non-local) assistance?

I'm very much of the opinion that where no staff are available to operate the gateline then the gates need to be left open - fare evasion should be a very secondary consideration.

 

[Fenchurch SP]

On a related point. What would be the situation if you made a valid break of journey and used one of these unmanned barriers, only to find that the machine retains the ticket instead of returning it as you pass through? I know that this error doesn’t happen often, I have only had it once, but you might be thoroughly snookered if it did.

Has happened to me with a paper season and they had to come over from the other side to retrieve it.
At busy times you see lots of people following others through the wide gates so I don't know how effective they are for revenue protection. I sometimes do it myself (with a valid ticket) instead of waiting for the gates to close.

 

[infobleep]

It seems like the railway cannot win when it comes to stations with multiple entrances/exits. Essentially there are four choices:

1. Close all the secondary barrier lines, have all entry and exit through one set of barriers which is staffed. Would not be popular with customers who use the now closed barriers.
2. Leave the main barrier line staffed but leave unstaffed barrier lines open. A fare dodgers paradise - people will be up in arms about fare evasion etc.
3. Staff secondary barrier lines at all times. Not feasible given the cost involved. People would be up in arms about staff 'sitting around' all day at little used barrier lines'
4. Use technology to remotely monitor secondary barrier lines. They could still be staffed at busy times, if requried.

To be honest option 4 is probably the most sensible balance between cost, revenue protection and passenger convenience.

Oxford Station use to have two entrances if I recall correctly and when they put barriers in, they closed one entrance. So option 1.

When London Waterloo got barriers the subway was closed outside of defined peak hours. Semi-option 1. Now days it is open at all times, as far as I can tell, which is much better. This is option 3 so must be considered feasible.

Guildford railway station had steps down to the car park from the footbridge that was open during defined peak hours for passengers to get to the car park, along with the Farnham Road car park. During the pandemic they closed this and never reopened it. Now only staff can use it via a key code to unlock the door. This is was semi-option 2 but is now option 1.

The back entrance to Guildford Station was manned from a defined morning point to 10 pm at night when they did their trial of not letting people cross the bridge. Now that trial is over they seem to have reverted to how it was prior to that. So option 3 for a time and but even then there were times when all barriers were unstaffed. That even happens at Burgess Hill. The reverting back is still semi-option 3.

Whilst I'm sure it exists elsewhere and people have given examples, I have only come across option 4 at GTR run stations but it only runs when staff are present, which isn't all the time.

I'm sure if one was a regularly passing through a station, they could work out the times when barriers are not manned but in order to do this, I think one would need to regularly buy a train ticket. If you didn't more likely you'd be caught without one during a time when it is manned.

 

[Benjwri]

Oxford Station use to have two entrances if I recall correctly and when they put barriers in, they closed one entrance. So option 1.

I don’t remember Oxford having an entrance which is now closed, in fact there are still 2 entrances, with one manned by Chiltern and the other GWR!

 

[Falcon1200]

It seems like the railway cannot win when it comes to stations with multiple entrances/exits. Essentially there are four choices:

1. Close all the secondary barrier lines, have all entry and exit through one set of barriers which is staffed. Would not be popular with customers who use the now closed barriers.
2. Leave the main barrier line staffed but leave unstaffed barrier lines open. A fare dodgers paradise - people will be up in arms about fare evasion etc.
3. Staff secondary barrier lines at all times. Not feasible given the cost involved. People would be up in arms about staff 'sitting around' all day at little used barrier lines'
4. Use technology to remotely monitor secondary barrier lines. They could still be staffed at busy times, if requried.

To be honest option 4 is probably the most sensible balance between cost, revenue protection and passenger convenience.

I agree re Option4, but also that the signage for those whose tickets do not work the barriers must be clear, obvious, and the help point must be responded to as quickly as possible.

Oxford Station use to have two entrances if I recall correctly and when they put barriers in, they closed one entrance. So option 1.

Oxford has two entrances/exits now, the long-existing one on Platform 3 at the main station building, and the much newer one near the buffers of Platforms 1 and 2; When the latter is unstaffed it is closed! Given the number of people who pour off trains at Oxford, in this case monitoring that one remotely as per Option 4 would be impractical.

 

[Benjwri]

But broadly I do agree. At least in the GWRland I am used to the unmonitored gatelines normally provide a shortcut, often to the car park. I cannot think of a remotely monitored gateline that is essential, they are purely there for convenience of passengers.

I think people are over exaggerating the importance of these gatelines, and are treating it as if someone is stranded if they don’t use them, whereas in reality if someone doesn’t want to push through one it doesn’t take much common sense to go find a member of platform staff, or just go to the main gateline, which is well signed and will be staffed, or use the help point which despite worst case scenarios being brought up about the help point not being answered, I’m yet to hear of it actually happening. I asked someone who works in the railway and they didn’t think agency staff would be allowed to operate a gateline with a remote one attached.

As I say though, these are for convenience of passengers. If you tell TOCs, who are already have cost cuts demanded by the DfT, they have to be staffed, you’ll find they just cease to be an entrance. If you force them to keep them open, they’ll have to cut something else.

 

[infobleep]

I don’t remember Oxford having an entrance which is now closed, in fact there are still 2 entrances, with one manned by Chiltern and the other GWR!

I am sure the platform over the footbridge had an exit. I'm going back to the 1990s.

 

[Benjwri]

I am sure the platform over the footbridge had an exit. I'm going back to the 1990s.

That is well before my time to know about. Was it before the 1990 rebuild?

Of course an entrance on that side will be reappearing in a few years regardless!

 

[DelW]

Having read all these replies, I fully agree that 4 is fine and can work and obviously it is what they were going for here. However, I do think if this is the route that companies are taking, the process needs to be clearly signposted on the gates themselves (maybe it is and there's just a lot of other clutter?). I certainly had no clue that the help point was different to the normal ones at all stations as a fairly seasoned traveller.

Or perhaps we're expected to have some knowledge of the stations we're travelling to - If I knew there was another gateline that was manned, I'd have gone to it rather than push through.

I think it would have helped if, instead of the generic "seek assistance", the gate readout had said something like "please contact station staff via the call point to your left [/right]". That would have made it clear that there were staff present, and that you could contact them and not simply be connected to someone in India who has no idea where Burgess Hill is.

For what it's worth, my local station has a remotely monitored side gate (an actual physical gate, not just a barrier line) which has a call point but no ticket reader. When I've used it, the gate has been released without my ever being asked to show a ticket to a camera (assuming there's one present).

 

[noddingdonkey]

It seems like the railway cannot win when it comes to stations with multiple entrances/exits. Essentially there are four choices:

1. Close all the secondary barrier lines, have all entry and exit through one set of barriers which is staffed. Would not be popular with customers who use the now closed barriers.
2. Leave the main barrier line staffed but leave unstaffed barrier lines open. A fare dodgers paradise - people will be up in arms about fare evasion etc.
3. Staff secondary barrier lines at all times. Not feasible given the cost involved. People would be up in arms about staff 'sitting around' all day at little used barrier lines'
4. Use technology to remotely monitor secondary barrier lines. They could still be staffed at busy times, if requried.

To be honest option 4 is probably the most sensible balance between cost, revenue protection and passenger convenience.

0. Fix the barriers so they don't reject valid tickets

 

[JamesT]

That is well before my time to know about. Was it before the 1990 rebuild?

Of course an entrance on that side will be reappearing in a few years regardless!

I'm pretty sure that gate is still there, I remember seeing it and I only started going through Oxford station in the 2000s. Unfortunately a quick google I can't find a decent photo of that platform to identify where it is. I've never seen it open, I assume it was intended to allow commuters at the end of the day to just exit without needing to use the bridge, but a more conscientious approach to checking tickets means funnelling everyone through the main entrance.

 

[Edsmith]

I don't really see a problem with that. There is a good case for some tickets to be seen by a human eye even if there are barriers. It would very good if passengers were told to expect the additional inspection though.

I see a problem with that, if I'm in a hurry why should I be delayed and have to find a member of staff to check the ticket and let me through? Often they're busy with something else and just open the gate without checking the ticket anyway.

 

[Gloster]

Recollection from my brief period at Oxford in the mid-1980s was that the entrance on the Down side (a solid, above head-height metal gate) was that it was for staff only, but could be used for passengers on (very rare) occasions. I used it to get to the staff car park.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The gatelines at GTR stations are only really there to deter casual fare evasion, not actually control revenue loss.

If that's the case, then surely the obvious solution is to programme the barriers to accept any ticket that could plausibly be valid [*]. So something like:

Accept ticket if validity period includes today AND ( EITHER it's from/to this station OR the origin and destination are in terms of rail geography on opposite sides of this station, so it's plausible that the person could be passing through on a valid journey).

Yes, that algorithm will accept many invalid tickets, but the point is it shouldn't (other than in times of disruption) reject valid tickets. That will deter casual fare evasion by preventing people who don't have any ticket from passing through the barriers. And it would mean you could be pretty sure that anyone jumping the barriers is almost certainly not in possession of a valid ticket.

[*[ I appreciate that with fares being so complex plus with the issue of railcards, it'd be basically impossible to program the barriers to know in every case whether a ticket is or isn't valid, so you have to be generous.

 

[Benjwri]

I'm pretty sure that gate is still there, I remember seeing it and I only started going through Oxford station in the 2000s. Unfortunately a quick google I can't find a decent photo of that platform to identify where it is. I've never seen it open, I assume it was intended to allow commuters at the end of the day to just exit without needing to use the bridge, but a more conscientious approach to checking tickets means funnelling everyone through the main entrance.

There is a gate on the side of the station, pictured below (Credit Google Streetview). However I have never seen it open, and I used to travel quite regularly there for around a decade. Officially its a Network Rail Access Point, I doubt staff even are allowed to open it, maybe even don't have a key!

 

[JGurney]

I don't really see a problem with that. There is a good case for some tickets to be seen by a human eye even if there are barriers. It would very good if passengers were told to expect the additional inspection though.

There is a problem if that human eye takes several minutes to get there, turning what should have been a convenient connection with a bus into a desperate rush for the bus and perhaps missing it.

 

[JamesT]

There is a gate on the side of the station, pictured below (Credit Google Streetview). However I have never seen it open, and I used to travel quite regularly there for around a decade. Officially its a Network Rail Access Point, I doubt staff even are allowed to open it, maybe even don't have a key!

That’s not the one I was thinking of. I’m thinking something more like @Gloster describes, part of the building on that side.