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

[miklcct]

Recently there are 3 threads in the disputes forum which concern me very much:

Threat of prosecution after boarding a delayed LNER train at the booked time:

I have been charged with an offence... but I feel that I did not commit it!

I don't want to give the OP false hope but it may be worth reading through this guidance: CPS guidance for private prosecutions In particular: When to take over a private prosecution in order to stop it A private prosecution should be taken over and stopped if, upon review of the case...

www.railforums.co.uk

Prosecution after boarding a later train after consecutive trains were cancelled:

(Update: Prosecution letter has been received) Ticket irregularity report issued by TPE after the worst group company cancelled 8 consecutive trains

A friend of mine bought a ticket for a journey on 20 Jan 02:20-03:31 from Leeds to Manchester Piccadilly (1st class advance single route Ap TPE only). Decided to treat himself for a more comfortable 1st class journey home after night out but it turned out to be a nightmare. His booked train was...

www.railforums.co.uk

Police called after accidentally boarding a wrong train following a delay:

Lumo Revenue Enforcement on Strike Day

New to the Forum, I'm wondering if anyone else has had a similar experience to mine. Before the announcement of the Wed 1st Feb strike, I'd bought a ticket from National Rail TrainSplit to travel on that day on the 10.27 Newcastle to Kings Cross train. This was cancelled and I'd been informed...

www.railforums.co.uk

Regarding the LNER case, I actually attempted to do so when I was at York and got confused by the information display, when there were trains to London running minutes between each other and the whole line was delayed by a few minutes. In that case, I saw the board, went to the platform of the train labelled with my time, but at that time the train appeared on another platform, I then ran there however the train was already dispatched and I was afraid that I missed the train. Then the staff told me that that's not my train and I had to return to the original platform. A few minutes later my train came.

All the above cases are destroying my confidence in buying Advance tickets for travelling by train.

I would like to ask:

Does anyone know a case, where a passenger is prosecuted after boarding another train on the same line / to the same destination following a delay / cancellation / missed connection of the booked train, and made to the court?

If so I would like to read about it.

 

[Class800]

All the above cases are destroying my confidence in buying Advance tickets for travelling by train.

The same for me. I pretty much always drive everywhere now. This will remain until the railway (if it ever does) turns itself around and gives benefit of doubt to passengers and puts burden of proofs on guards and RPIs to prove intent (and not just infer it) and actually operates in a way that is compatible with the aims of equality and diversity where a person with disability would have nothing to fear and any genuine disability related mistakes would be accepted. I've had it with the UK railways to be honest. I use them for work. I am still really interested in rail and will be on forum. But leisure travel, generally, no thanks, unless I must and then - as it's so rare, I usually just get flexible splits

 

[JonathanH]

All the above cases are destroying my confidence in buying Advance tickets for travelling by train.

A large number of passengers travel successfully without any risk of prosecution on advance tickets every day.

Without wishing to judge the outcome of any of the specific disputes you have read about, the important thing to do is to seek approval from a member of staff or get your ticket endorsed if something goes wrong and don't just assume that you can take a given course of action that you decide.

 

[1955LR]

I was on a TFW journey last week & a couple next to me had written authority from the Ticket office at Shrewsbury to travel on an alternate train due to cancellations , with an official stamp and signature . This I suspect is an ideal situation & is not readily available under lots of circumstances. Note- they had etickets.

 

[Wallsendmag]

A large number of passengers travel successfully without any risk of prosecution on advance tickets every day.

Without wishing to judge the outcome of any of the specific disputes you have read about, the important thing to do is to seek approval from a member of staff or get your ticket endorsed if something goes wrong and don't just assume that you can take a given course of action that you decide.

Exactly this, thousands of people travel on an Advance train every day without any problem plus some apps will even tell you where to stand on which platform to catch your train.

 

[johncrossley]

if something goes wrong

If something goes wrong the industry should be rolling out the red carpet rather than adding insult to injury.

 

[Watershed]

A large number of passengers travel successfully without any risk of prosecution on advance tickets every day.

That's not correct. The current legal position means that there is always a risk of prosecution. That risk may be small on any individual journey, but tens if not hundreds of thousands of people are prosecuted for rail fare offences each year.

Exactly this, thousands of people travel on an Advance train every day without any problem plus some apps will even tell you where to stand on which platform to catch your train.

I'm sure that's of great solace to the passengers in the linked threads, who face prosecution due to failings on the part of the railway...

 

[JonathanH]

If something goes wrong the industry should be rolling out the red carpet rather than adding insult to injury.

That isn't wrong, but it remains for the railway to decide how to roll out the red carpet, not the passenger to assume any particular red carpet is for them.

 

[johncrossley]

That isn't wrong, but it remains for the railway to decide how to roll out the red carpet, not the passenger to assume any particular red carpet is for them.

So it isn't wrong. Therefore the boycott is justified.

 

[JonathanH]

That's not correct. The current legal position means that there is always a risk of prosecution. That risk may be small on any individual journey, but tens if not hundreds of thousands of people are prosecuted for rail fare offences each year.

Huh? I agree that if something goes wrong there is then a risk of prosecution if someone decides that you have taken the wrong course of action as a result.

However, what risk of prosecution is there if you follow the itinerary on your advance ticket, the train runs, and you have your ticket to hand throughout the journey?

I appreciate that if I choose to leave the train at the wrong station, board the wrong train or don't have the ticket available for inspection, it is absolutely fair game for me to be prosecuted for not following the terms and conditions I signed up to. However, most people don't do that.

 

[Ken H]

If someone makes a mistake then the courts should consider if there was wilful intent to defraud. Indeed I thought the prosecution needed to prove that. However, There are are some strict liability laws - is railway fraud one of them?

 

[johncrossley]

the train runs

It sometimes doesn't run! Delayed train should mean guaranteed exemption from prosecution. In fact, prosecution is too harsh a penalty for travelling by train under any circumstances unless there is obvious and persistent fraud. Other countries treat fare evasion as a civil offence, which is more appropriate.

However, what risk of prosecution is there if you follow the itinerary on your advance ticket, the train runs, and you have your ticket to hand throughout the journey?

What if your phone gets stolen during the journey? You have no e-ticket, therefore you get prosecuted.

 

[JonathanH]

What if your phone gets stolen during the journey? You have no e-ticket, therefore you get prosecuted.

Passengers can currently choose whether they want to have a ticket on their smartphone or in 'paper' form. I don't think it is a reason to be concerned about the use of advance tickets, over any other type of ticket, as the outcome is the same in the case of having a phone stolen.

 

[Darandio]

What if your phone gets stolen during the journey? You have no e-ticket, therefore you get prosecuted.

What if your physical ticket gets stolen during the journey? You have no ticket, therefore you get prosecuted. Why the constant emphasis on technology being the issue?

 

[johncrossley]

Passengers can currently choose whether they want to have a ticket on their smartphone or in 'paper' form. I don't think it is a reason to be concerned about the use of advance tickets, over any other type of ticket, as the outcome is the same in the case of having a phone stolen.

I'm just using the example of a phone being stolen because it is prone to theft. I could have equally said your wallet containing a paper ticket. It is obvious that there anyone here could get a criminal record as a result of their ticket being stolen, whether it is on paper, e-ticket or smartcard.

What if your physical ticket gets stolen during the journey? You have no ticket, therefore you get prosecuted. Why the constant emphasis on technology being the issue?

As stated above, I don't exclude paper or smartcards from this discussion. You can get a criminal record as a result of your ticket being stolen regardless of format. Other ticket types such as Anytime and Off-Peak can lead you open to such a risk, not just Advance.

 

[Darandio]

You can get a criminal record as a result of your ticket being stolen regardless of format. Other ticket types such as Anytime and Off-Peak can lead you open to such a risk, not just Advance.

Yet the chances of this happening are still vanishingly small but as always blown hugely out of proportion on this forum. Avoiding buying advance tickets or even resorting to avoiding the railway altogether is complete overkill.

 

[johncrossley]

Yet the chances of this happening are still vanishingly small but as always blown hugely out of proportion on this forum. Avoiding buying advance tickets or even resorting to avoiding the railway altogether is complete overkill.

The chance of your house getting flooded or burned down is extremely tiny but you wouldn't go without the insurance because the consequences are so severe.

 

[najaB]

Getting a criminal record is too severe a penalty for making a simple mistake that any of us could make, especially the LNER one. If you get a criminal record you can't work again or emigrate to many if not most countries.

Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the situations described, it is almost impossible for a ticketing incident to result in a permanent criminal record.

Even if it did result in a conviction (which is far from likely where the passenger is cooperative), it would be hidden from all but the most invasive form of DBS check after twelve months.

On top of that, Unlock (and other organisations) exist precisely because a criminal record doesn't mean that you can't gain employment.

 

[Darandio]

The chance of your house getting flooded or burned down is extremely tiny but you wouldn't go without the insurance because the consequences are so severe. Getting a criminal record basically means the end of your life.

And now we've gone full ridiculous RailUK mode.....

 

[Watershed]

Huh? I agree that if something goes wrong there is then a risk of prosecution if someone decides that you have taken the wrong course of action as a result.

However, what risk of prosecution is there if you follow the itinerary on your advance ticket, the train runs, and you have your ticket to hand throughout the journey?

There is always a residual risk of prosecution due to factors that are outside your control. Your ticket (in whichever medium it might be) could be lost or stolen. You might come across a member of staff who wrongly claims your ticket is invalid. Or, as in the linked threads, the train might be cancelled and you take the next one but be penalised because it is operated by the 'wrong' company.

The mere fact that prosecution is possible for honest mistakes is problematic.

I appreciate that if I choose to leave the train at the wrong station, board the wrong train or don't have the ticket available for inspection, it is absolutely fair game for me to be prosecuted for not following the terms and conditions I signed up to. However, most people don't do that.

You may see prosecution as fair game for breaching terms and conditions, but I'd wager that you find yourself in a tiny minority of people in holding that view. The average person - insofar as they have any appreciation of the difference between a civil matter and a criminal offence - would likely find that utterly disproportionate.

If someone makes a mistake then the courts should consider if there was wilful intent to defraud. Indeed I thought the prosecution needed to prove that. However, There are are some strict liability laws - is railway fraud one of them?

Unfortunately Byelaw 18 creates a strict liability offence. If it ever served any legitimate purpose, it certainly doesn't do so anymore, now that Penalty Fares have been increased in value as to provide a sufficient disincentive (even if the system has flaws).

 

[MarlowDonkey]

I don't think it's always entirely clear what you can or cannot do with Advance tickets.

I had a recent experience of this when the through LNER service from Harrogate to Kings Cross via Leeds was cancelled. The staff at Harrogate, Northern presumably, were advising passengers booked for this train that they could travel via York, being the next depature and made a reference to them when arriving at York. At York though, the next Kings Cross train was a Grand Central one. Was my Advance LNER valid on that service? I didn't try it on as the next LNER service was only a few minutes later, although a stopper rather the non-stop Grand Central. In the event there was enough slack in the cross London transfer and connections that I made my ultimate destination according to the time of the original itinerary.

 

[najaB]

Unfortunately Byelaw 18 creates a strict liability offence. If it ever served any legitimate purpose, it certainly doesn't do so anymore, now that Penalty Fares have been increased in value as to provide a sufficient disincentive (even if the system has flaws).

Except that not all operators have Penalty Fares schemes.

 

[Watershed]

Except that not all operators have Penalty Fares schemes.

Most of the operators without Penalty Fares schemes are ones where it would be inappropriate to use Byelaw 18 anyway - e.g. they mainly operate services where it's feasible to check all passengers' tickets.

If it's seen as unacceptable to lose the ability to penalise ticketless passengers where intent to avoid payment can't be proven, it would hardly be beyond the wit of mankind to expand Penalty Fares to apply nationwide. For all their flaws, Penalty Fares are at least a lot more regulated, bring the possibility of an independent appeal, and aren't subject to quite the same abuses as prosecutions.

 

[najaB]

For all their flaws, Penalty Fares are at least a lot more regulated, bring the possibility of an independent appeal, and aren't subject to quite the same abuses as prosecutions.

Byelaw 18 would be perfectly acceptable if potential prosecutions were handled centrally, rather than by the TOCs.

 

[dosxuk]

One of the problems with the disputes sub forum is that it over-exaggerates the number of issues faced by normal passengers. It is far from an accurate portrayal of the scale of issues that people are facing on the system day-to-day. We also generally only hear about issues from the viewpoint of the passenger - and there are many cases in that thread of people forgetting to mention various factors that mean their issue goes from "sure, we'll sort that" to "being kicked off the train at an unscheduled stop" until much later in the conversation. It's right that the disputes forum should always take the passenger at their word when giving out advice, but that should not mean anyone takes their word as gospel in a wider context.

There is always a residual risk of prosecution due to factors that are outside your control. Your ticket (in whichever medium it might be) could be lost or stolen. You might come across a member of staff who wrongly claims your ticket is invalid.

Do you have any statistics on the number of passengers that are prosecuted annually as a result of their ticket being stolen? Or who have been on the receiving end of a member of staff wrongly claiming a ticket is invalid?

Or, as in the linked threads, the train might be cancelled and you take the next one but be penalised because it is operated by the 'wrong' company.

Again, any statistics on numbers of prosecutions where passengers have boarded the wrong operators service after engaging with the industry (e.g. social media, station staff, on board crew)?

 

[Wallsendmag]

I'm just using the example of a phone being stolen because it is prone to theft. I could have equally said your wallet containing a paper ticket. It is obvious that there anyone here could get a criminal record as a result of their ticket being stolen, whether it is on paper, e-ticket or smartcard.



As stated above, I don't exclude paper or smartcards from this discussion. You can get a criminal record as a result of your ticket being stolen regardless of format. Other ticket types such as Anytime and Off-Peak can lead you open to such a risk, not just Advance.

I can honestly say hand on heart I’ve had physical tickets stolen more times than I have my ph9ne

 

[johncrossley]

I can honestly say hand on heart I’ve had physical tickets stolen more times than I have my ph9ne

So you could have been prosecuted if you had a ticket check.

 

[najaB]

So you could have been prosecuted if you had a ticket check.

Could have, yes. But I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that, much like myself, the handful of times this has happened (not had a ticket to present) I explained the situation and the guard/RPI either let me pay for a new one or allowed me to complete my journey.

And, before you ask, this wasn't only in Scotland.

 

[robbeech]

If you get a criminal record you can't work again or emigrate to many if not most countries.

I hear you have to have one of your legs removed too. What nonsense.

If someone makes a mistake then the courts should consider if there was wilful intent to defraud. Indeed I thought the prosecution needed to prove that. However, There are are some strict liability laws - is railway fraud one of them?

They do that. Maybe more cases should go to court, either the court or the railway might get fed up of it.

What if your physical ticket gets stolen during the journey? You have no ticket, therefore you get prosecuted. Why the constant emphasis on technology being the issue?

The daftest thing is, technology gets this negative press, yet with an E ticket, a willing staff member may well be able to access the E ticket themselves, something they couldn’t do with a paper one.

Getting a criminal record basically means the end of your life.

…… I have no words for this one.

So you could have been prosecuted if you had a ticket check.

They could indeed, but if it was clear there was no intent, something the railway would need to prove in court then no RoRA prosecution could be made, so no criminal record. It’s much more likely that a reasonable discussion would allow them to buy another ticket, or they may even be allowed to travel.


We must not forget that the vast majority of referrals for prosecution for ticketless travel is done where the passenger is in the wrong. The vast majority of that subset is for deliberate fare evasion. This is the reason they take the hard line.
Is there room for improvement, absolutely, but some of the suggestions we see here are not viable.

 

[johncrossley]

but some of the suggestions we see here are not viable.

Which ones in particular? How about making fare evasion a civil matter rather than a criminal one? Why isn't that viable?