I'm getting uncomfortable reading the disputes forum now - they are making me lose confidence in traveling with Advance tickets.

[johncrossley]

Do you have any figures on the number of people to get a criminal record through accidentally having the wrong ticket and the railway being in the wrong? How many last year? How many in the last 10 years?

The railway is normally technically in the right even if they are morally in the wrong. In those cases, I can tolerate some kind of civil penalty, but not a criminal record. So you have to look at the number of people who have a criminal record through the railway being technically in the right but the passenger accidentally having the wrong ticket. I'm not in the industry so I don't have statistics on criminal records but I can see the tales of woe on this forum. Even if few people get a criminal record, a huge problem is the anxiety faced when you have to wait until a decision on your punishment is made and the constant worrying about whether the TOC will allow an out of court settlement. I don't think I could go through that without falling into a deep depression.

Or be caught holding the device with the navigation app on just twice. Or even, just a police officer deciding that your hands free mount for your device obstructs your view four times - that also carries 3 penalty points. You don't even need to have done anything wrong for that one to be applied.

As you point out, you get at least one more chance before losing your licence. And even if that happens, you don't get a criminal record if you reach 12 points in those ways. Of course, a modern car will have Android Auto so those issues can't arise.

 

[Ken H]

The railway is normally technically in the right even if they are morally in the wrong. In those cases, I can tolerate some kind of civil penalty, but not a criminal record. So you have to look at the number of people who have a criminal record through the railway being technically in the right but the passenger accidentally having the wrong ticket. I'm not in the industry so I don't have statistics on criminal records but I can see the tales of woe on this forum. Even if few people get a criminal record, a huge problem is the anxiety faced when you have to wait until a decision on your punishment is made and the constant worrying about whether the TOC will allow an out of court settlement. I don't think I could go through that without falling into a deep depression.



As you point out, you get at least one more chance before losing your licence. And even if that happens, you don't get a criminal record if you reach 12 points in those ways.

And its easy to make sure you satnav isnt obscuring the view out of the front. Is it covering part of the area swept by the wipers? If it is, its illegal.
Knowing if you are breaking the law with your ticket on the train you are on. Hmmmmm.

 

[AlterEgo]

How many people are successfully prosecuted for a *recordable* offence? The recordable offences require intent to evade the fare and are not usually a simple ticketing mishap. Nearly every case in the D+P forum involves a simple bylaw offence of the same magnitude as a minor motoring matter.

 

[najaB]

So you have to look at the number of people who have a criminal record through the railway being technically in the right but the passenger accidentally having the wrong ticket.

I'm also not in the industry, but I would put my money on the answer being close to, if not actually, zero. Simply because the recordable offenses require sufficient evidence of intent, which would be very hard to prove in a "wrong ticket for this train" case unless the passenger had a history of such actions. The vast majority of cases that reach the court are under the Railway Byelaws and only reach that far because the passenger didn't engage with the TOC.

 

[dosxuk]

The railway is normally technically in the right even if they are morally in the wrong.

None of the three examples in this thread I see as cases where the railway is morally in the wrong. Passengers were on the wrong trains due to their own decisions, not because of accidents outside their control. People need to take responsibility when they make mistakes - and sometimes those mistakes can be costly - not just expect suppliers to bend over backwards to make things right for them or try and find loopholes to make it the suppliers problem.

Even the closest to being morally wrong, the case of the passenger boarding a train without checking as it was at the right time, they were given the opportunity to buy a new ticket / pay a penalty on board (which they could then have had their original ticket refunded, or complained to customer services and likely got a refund of), only to start arguing that their ticket was valid and it was the train company that was unable to comply. It's only after several opportunities to sort the matter out that it is progressing to the possibility of a criminal record.

So you have to look at the number of people who have a criminal record through the railway being technically in the right but the passenger accidentally having the wrong ticket. I'm not in the industry so I don't have statistics on criminal records but I can see the tales of woe on this forum.

So you have no idea if even a single person has been given a criminal record for an accident through no fault of their own? Don't you think if this was something happening all the time we'd hear more about it? Even if you only look at the people posting in the D&P forum, it's vanishingly few who actually seem to end up being convicted - and most of those seem to be where there is obvious wrong doing on the part of the passenger (e.g. using someone else's Freedom pass).


And for the record, I'm not part of the railway industry, have never been part of it, and have no ties to it - I'm not trying to defend their behaviour because my own interests are at risk.

 

[johncrossley]

People need to take responsibility when they make mistakes - and sometimes those mistakes can be costly

Wrong approach. You just put off travellers that way. Penalties need to be appropriate to the level of the crime. A criminal record is too harsh a penalty.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wrong approach. You just put off travellers that way. Penalties need to be appropriate to the level of the crime. A criminal record is too harsh a penalty.

A Penalty Fare is in the same magnitude as a parking penalty issued by e.g. a Council, so my view remains that the new higher PF means the Byelaw and RoRA should be repealed and PFs the only means of enforcement against ticketing offences that would not invoke a fraud charge.

I could concede on it being a criminal offence to receive three PFs in a rolling twelve month period or something, though, if they do want something to "get" persistent offenders. Has anyone who wasn't deliberately taking the mick (even to the level of "pay when challenged") had a PF three times in a year? I've never had one.

 

[dosxuk]

Wrong approach. You just put off travellers that way. Penalties need to be appropriate to the level of the crime. A criminal record is too harsh a penalty.

Very rarely is a criminal record the only option being discussed for the issues we see in the D&P section. I don't have the figures, but I would suspect that the vast majority of these types of ticket irregularity are solved by means of the passenger buying or excessing to a new, valid, ticket for the service they have actually caught, or paying a penalty fare.

In my opinion, for things to get to the threat of prosecution stage either takes a significant amount of belligerence on the part of the accused, unwillingness to deal with the process, or for the suspected offence to be sufficiently serious that a simple new ticket or penalty is inappropriate. The handful of cases I've seen in the D&P section where things have plainly gone wrong and the threat of prosecution should never have been made, have all been solved through engagement with the railway and been solved to both parties satisfaction.

This is why I believe the number of people to have ended up with a criminal record after an honest accident is so low as to not be a concern - if, indeed, it has actually ever happened.

 

[johncrossley]

This is why I believe the number of people to have ended up with a criminal record after an honest accident is so low as to not be a concern - if, indeed, it has actually ever happened.

If it doesn't happen, then remove the threat of a criminal record.

 

[redreni]

None of the three examples in this thread I see as cases where the railway is morally in the wrong. Passengers were on the wrong trains due to their own decisions, not because of accidents outside their control. People need to take responsibility when they make mistakes - and sometimes those mistakes can be costly - not just expect suppliers to bend over backwards to make things right for them or try and find loopholes to make it the suppliers problem.

Even the closest to being morally wrong, the case of the passenger boarding a train without checking as it was at the right time, they were given the opportunity to buy a new ticket / pay a penalty on board (which they could then have had their original ticket refunded, or complained to customer services and likely got a refund of), only to start arguing that their ticket was valid and it was the train company that was unable to comply. It's only after several opportunities to sort the matter out that it is progressing to the possibility of a criminal record.



So you have no idea if even a single person has been given a criminal record for an accident through no fault of their own? Don't you think if this was something happening all the time we'd hear more about it? Even if you only look at the people posting in the D&P forum, it's vanishingly few who actually seem to end up being convicted - and most of those seem to be where there is obvious wrong doing on the part of the passenger (e.g. using someone else's Freedom pass).


And for the record, I'm not part of the railway industry, have never been part of it, and have no ties to it - I'm not trying to defend their behaviour because my own interests are at risk.

I'm not sure if you work in the railway, but your post reflects a common attitude among people who do which, in my view, really ought to change.

It almost certainly drives away more revenue than it protects, and even if it doesn't, it's inconsistent with the goal of encouraging people to use the greenest form of transport.

P.S. It really is appalling to blame the passenger who checked with staff and was told he could board the train with the ticket he had, only to be penalised despite taking the trouble to check. A very good example of the sort of thinking that must be driven out of the industry.

 

[Haywain]

This is why I believe the number of people to have ended up with a criminal record after an honest accident is so low as to not be a concern - if, indeed, it has actually ever happened

I think it is safe to assume that it has actually happened, although it is likely that in those cases it will tend to happen to those who are not overly bothered about having a criminal record.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If it doesn't happen, then remove the threat of a criminal record.

Most of the time it seemed to be TOCs dissatisfied with the level of the Penalty Fare (which at £20 was little more than a light slap on the wrist) using prosecution as a form of blackmail to extort their preferred level of penalty of around £100+fare. The increased Penalty Fare should allow a move away from that, though it'll be interesting to see if it actually does.

 

[Ken H]

Very rarely is a criminal record the only option being discussed for the issues we see in the D&P section. I don't have the figures, but I would suspect that the vast majority of these types of ticket irregularity are solved by means of the passenger buying or excessing to a new, valid, ticket for the service they have actually caught, or paying a penalty fare.

In my opinion, for things to get to the threat of prosecution stage either takes a significant amount of belligerence on the part of the accused, unwillingness to deal with the process, or for the suspected offence to be sufficiently serious that a simple new ticket or penalty is inappropriate. The handful of cases I've seen in the D&P section where things have plainly gone wrong and the threat of prosecution should never have been made, have all been solved through engagement with the railway and been solved to both parties satisfaction.

This is why I believe the number of people to have ended up with a criminal record after an honest accident is so low as to not be a concern - if, indeed, it has actually ever happened.

Why is the railway so special it needs the criminal law to be a factor? I can buy from my butcher, super market, DIY shop, and also from my ISP, energy supplier, mobile phone provider ets with little risk of a penalty charge or a criminal charge.

 

[dosxuk]

I'm not sure if you work in the railway, but your post reflects a common attitude among people who do which, in my view, really ought to change.

It almost certainly drives away more revenue than it protects, and even if it doesn't, it's inconsistent with the goal of encouraging people to use the greenest form of transport.

As I stated in post #123, I do not have any links to the railway industry.

Plus, I suspect my desire of having people with messed up travel plans actually talking to railway staff before making their own choices, would go against the desires of several of the station staff I've had the misfortune to need to interact with, but then, I'd like to remove them from passenger facing roles too.

 

[g492p]

Wrong approach. You just put off travellers that way. Penalties need to be appropriate to the level of the crime. A criminal record is too harsh a penalty.

Is there any evidence that this puts people off en mass? I can’t imagine it does, considering how rail travel boomed in the 90s, 00’s and 10’s despite most all of these same rules and worse being in place.

 

[johncrossley]

Is there any evidence that this puts people off en mass? I can’t imagine it does, considering how rail travel boomed in the 90s, 00’s and 10’s despite most all of these same rules and worse being in place.

How do you know there wouldn't have been even more people using the trains if the rules were more customer friendly? I'm boycotting the TOCs concerned and others have said on thread or via private messages that they are doing the same.

 

[SteveM70]

How do you know there wouldn't have been even more people using the trains if the rules were more customer friendly? I'm boycotting the TOCs concerned and others have said on thread or via private messages that they are doing the same.

Your approach intrigues me. Are you boycotting every TOC where you’re aware they’ve “got it wrong”? This thread started with a loss of confidence in advance tickets, so it’s moved on rapidly!

 

[Llanigraham]

Is there any evidence that this puts people off en mass? I can’t imagine it does, considering how rail travel boomed in the 90s, 00’s and 10’s despite most all of these same rules and worse being in place.

It doesn't. Just look at the number of incidents in the relevant section here where people state they didn't know they could be prosecuted or even that they had broken the law.
if Mr Crossley no longer wishes to use the railway then fine, but his boycott isn't going to make a scrap of difference

 

[AlterEgo]

How do you know there wouldn't have been even more people using the trains if the rules were more customer friendly? I'm boycotting the TOCs concerned and others have said on thread or via private messages that they are doing the same.

Just boycott every service provider that has ever mistreated a customer (or in at least one case, in this thread, someone who wasn’t a customer at all!). Do keep us posted, if that is possible at all, given you’ll have no internet or phone provider for a start.

 

[najaB]

I'm boycotting the TOCs concerned and others have said on thread or via private messages that they are doing the same.

What proportion of the c. 350 million passenger journeys made annually do you think that represents?

 

[Ken H]

What proportion of the c. 350 million passenger journeys made annually do you think that represents?

Probably after your 3rd late journey, you say stuff it and use the M62.

 

[johncrossley]

What proportion of the c. 350 million passenger journeys made annually do you think that represents?

Obviously you don't know how many are put off the railways who don't post on forums.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Most of the time it seemed to be TOCs dissatisfied with the level of the Penalty Fare (which at £20 was little more than a light slap on the wrist) using prosecution as a form of blackmail to extort their preferred level of penalty of around £100+fare.

This thought has occurred to me, also. And a tactic used/abused by some TOCs more than others.

The increased Penalty Fare should allow a move away from that, though it'll be interesting to see if it actually does.

Indeed. We shall see.

 

[g492p]

Obviously you don't know how many are put off the railways who don't post on forums.

I think the point is no one here seems to have those statistics. The assertion that advance ticketing rules and the threat of prosecution are putting people off the railway in any great number is highly speculative.

 

[najaB]

Obviously you don't know how many are put off the railways who don't post on forums.

Yet somehow you're able to confidently state that it's an issue.

 

[SteveM70]

Obviously you don't know how many are put off the railways who don't post on forums.

And yet you happily accept every word said by the disgruntled OPs (or in one case friend of the OP, if I remember correctly)

 

[johncrossley]

And yet you happily accept every word said by the disgruntled OPs (or in one case friend of the OP, if I remember correctly)

Why would they lie? It is clear that many people have had correspondence by post where a criminal record was mentioned, even if it is just used as blackmail. It isn't really worth taking the risk. Remove the worry by taking the car or coach instead.

 

[SteveM70]

Why would they lie? It is clear that many people have had correspondence by post where a criminal record was mentioned, even if it is just used as blackmail. It isn't really worth taking the risk. Remove the worry by taking the car or coach instead.

Oh come on, were you born yesterday? We see loads of cases on here where the OP states what happened in their first post and by the end of the thread other relevant information has emerged.

Why would they lie? Because they want advice that might help them avoid a penalty

 

[najaB]

Why would they lie?

Well, leaving aside the obvious incentives to lie, that still leads vast potential for them to be posting their interpretation of the facts, which may or may not correspond with what a disinterested third party might well report. How many times have we read that the "RPI was aggressive" leaving the OP in tears, when that third party might report that the RPI was merely firm in their questioning? How many times has "My train was about to leave and the line at the ticket office was out the door" failed to mention the fact that there were ticket machines available? And so on.

Probably after your 3rd late journey, you say stuff it and use the M62.

Which has nothing to do with people being scared off by the risk of prosecution.

 

[Llanigraham]

Perhaps Mr Crossley should look at the Peepo forum and the number of people who have been issued with parking infringement notices and other motoring offences, and reconsider his assumption that travelling by car is any "safer". There are far more there than in this forum.

And checking legislation there are numerous motoring offences that can easily tot up to 12 points or more in just one citing, from tyres to lights, mobile phones to vehicle defects. As an ex-Driving Assessor for a charity I can assure him that motoring offences are far more common even for unintended matters than railway ticketing "problems".