In Trouble for Using A Ticket Displaying "DISC"

[Deerfold]

FCC have sort of apologised. Ish. They say they were not aware of the discounted tickets that Southern were selling on their website.

That may be quite true but rather misses the point that "DISC" is used for all sorts of discounts, most of which do not require a railcard. You may want to press them on that (or if you get your refund and vouchers and fancy an easier life, you may not )

 

[yorkie]

'DISC' tickets should not be that uncommon on FCC. If you book through websites such as East Coast, and select postal delivery, the tickets often have "DISC" printed on them. Many people must book journeys from EC stations to FCC stations, and some of them will surely book online and get tickets posted!

The excuse given is not really adequate, and it also fails to address the important issue of the way RPIs are trained and how some of them treat customers.

 

[Deerfold]

'DISC' tickets should not be that uncommon on FCC. If you book through websites such as East Coast, and select postal delivery, the tickets often have "DISC" printed on them. Many people must book journeys from EC stations to FCC stations, and some of them will surely book online and get tickets posted!

The excuse given is not really adequate, and it also fails to address the important issue of the way RPIs are trained and how some of them treat customers.

Indeed - I mentioned it in post #39. I used to travel several times a year on advance tickets between various West Yorkshire stations and Hitchin. At least some of these had the DISC code on them due to the ~10% discount online.

 

[pinguini]

Looks like this story made it into the media:

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10298520.First_Capital_Connect_says_sorry_to_woman_over_wrong_fine/

A rail company criticised for its poor customer satisfaction levels has issued an apology to a grieving passenger it wrongly fined and then accused of being confused by ticket rules.

First Capital Connect (FCC) incorrectly fined Lucy Graubart, claiming she had bought the wrong kind of ticket to travel to a friend’s funeral.

When Ms Graubart, from Brighton, complained through The Argus that FCC’s inspectors had been “rude, aggressive and intimidating”, the rail company insisted the passenger was mistaken and must have bought the wrong kind of ticket.
She said she had been subjected to “20 minutes of bullying” before being issued with a fine for having the wrong ticket by an inspector named Theo.

FCC claimed she had been correctly fined more than £50 as her ticket was only valid with a railcard.

But after Ms Graubart said she was determined to prove she had bought the correct ticket and been unfairly treated, FCC has finally admitted it was wrong.

 

[sheff1]

'A spokesman for the train operator said: “We want to apologise to Ms G for this genuine misunderstanding...'

Some misunderstanding !!

A pity the paper did not mention the 'DISC' code as this might allow any others who have been incorrectly charged to claim their money back and also alert others who are wrongly accused in the future. I suspect though that such detail would be thought too technical in the eyes of the journalist/editor.

 

[jon0844]

It's a shame that a story/incident that was actually perfectly newsworthy in its own right had to be made more 'human' with the reference to a funeral (irrelevant) and failed to mention the actual problem (relevant).

But, hey, Joe Public aren't really worried about too many facts when they can be outraged!

I was under the impression, FCC quite quickly acknowledged the mistake and dealt with it quite professionally.. so it's another shame that it reads like it took ages and loads of determination to convince them - which will just make everyone think FCC is 'typically useless'.

 

[LuluG]

It's a shame that a story/incident that was actually perfectly newsworthy in its own right had to be made more 'human' with the reference to a funeral (irrelevant) and failed to mention the actual problem (relevant).

But, hey, Joe Public aren't really worried about too many facts when they can be outraged!


The fact I was going to a funeral was perfectly relevant to me - the passenger in question; I had asked the revenue collector to be more sympathetic and less agressive towards me because I was going to a funeral - he said 'I don't care where you're going'

I was under the impression, FCC quite quickly acknowledged the mistake and dealt with it quite professionally.. so it's another shame that it reads like it took ages and loads of determination to convince them - which will just make everyone think FCC is 'typically useless'.

incorrect - FCC refused to listen to me, refused to acknowledge their error and it DID TAKE AGES and an amazing amount of hard work and determination to convince them - and they WERE typically useless. Perhaps get your facts straight before making comments like that.

 

[michael769]

It's a shame that a story/incident that was actually perfectly newsworthy in its own right had to be made more 'human' with the reference to a funeral (irrelevant)

I cannot agree that the purpose of the OPs journey is irrelevant. The people that FCCs RPIs deal with are real human beings with human feelings. While most of an RPI's "customers" are criminals who deserve little or no sympathy, when they get it wrong it is an entirely different matter.

Perhaps if FCCs management, trainers and RPIs showed a little empathy and understanding towards those they are accusing of (what is effectively) stealing, and the impact that that accusation will have on their life, they would be more willing to invest in a minimum adequate level of training.

If this was a rare one off I'd be happy to show sympathy to the OP but write it off as one of those things, but as FCCs persisted in their refusal to accept that their RPI had made a mistake, one must conclude that the senior managers of FCC and the board and Executive Directors of First Group feel that it is morally acceptable to risk treating a bereaved human being in such fashion, for want of a minimum adequate investment in training and supervision. Given the substantial public subsidies that First Group enjoy from taxpayers I feel that it is entirely in order that the public be fully informed about the behavior that their subsidy is being used to part fund.

 

[Ferret]

Crap journalism, full of errors regarding the actual facts of the case, and missing crucial information that may assist others (and with my facetious mode switched on, perhaps it would help FCC's own RPIs!) - that being the type of ticket our OP was using. Not to mention talk of 'fines'...

Why are our nation's journalists so poor?!

Tbh Michael769, I don't agree that the crux of the story is that the customer here was en route to a funeral as that may not have been apparent to the staff at the time of the incident; what is crucial though is that FCC's RPIs don't seem to be adequately trained to do their job properly. In that sense, the OP is right - FCC have been rather useless!

 

[michael769]

Tbh Michael769, I don't agree that the crux of the story is that the customer here was en route to a funeral as that may not have been apparent to the staff at the time of the incident;

I didn't mean to claim that it is the crux of the issue - it is not! However it is an aggravating factor, and the fact that it would not be apparent is not really an excuse, any more than travelling to a funeral would be a valid excuse for fare dodging is an excuse (which was their position). The fact is that they do not know the circumstances of any of those who are accused, and in choosing to not provide sufficient training they must accept responsibility for the consequences of their actions no matter what they might be.

One of the reasons that so many companies treat their customers so unacceptable badly (and not just on the Railway) is because the executives whose poor decisions lead to such treatment hide behind their company and refuse to take personal responsibility for their poor behavior. If more was done to hold them to account personally things might actually improve.

 

[Ferret]

I just wish that the really important facts were covered, rather than immediately reaching for the heart-strings. A fail on several counts by this particular journalist, who no doubt thinks that they did a wonderful job when the reality is completely the opposite.

I'm glad the OP managed to get a successful outcome though, and at least FCC finally acknowledged their error. Whether they ensure there is no repeat remains to be seen.....

 

[maniacmartin]

I don't think the funeral is that relevant.

That would imply that if the OP was not going to a funeral, then FCC should have been more assertive in their incorrect assumptions about the ticket? I think not.

 

[Realfish]

Crap journalism, full of errors regarding the actual facts of the case, and missing crucial information that may assist others (and with my facetious mode switched on, perhaps it would help FCC's own RPIs!) - that being the type of ticket our OP was using. Not to mention talk of 'fines'...

Why are our nation's journalists so poor?!

Tbh Michael769, I don't agree that the crux of the story is that the customer here was en route to a funeral as that may not have been apparent to the staff at the time of the incident; what is crucial though is that FCC's RPIs don't seem to be adequately trained to do their job properly. In that sense, the OP is right - FCC have been rather useless!

Correct and correct again.

The press will choose what part of the story will most appeal / interest / agitate the reader.

With regard to FCC, as well as an admission (and surely an apology) I would have been interested to have an assurance that steps were being taken to ensure things like this don't happen again. You're right, in their training, FCC need to ensure that staff have acquired the right KSI (knowledge, skills and attitude) - it would appear that a couple of these were missing in in this case. And given the low level of customer satisfaction, I wonder if they have a problem of corporate culture?

 

[yorkie]

FCC do not seem willing to give any such assurances.

FCC have threatened 3 passengers with PROSECUTION for travelling on a route recommended to them by the FCC website. One went to Court, but FCC backed out at the last minute, incurring FCC a large sum in costs, another was dropped, and I am waiting to hear if the other has been dropped or if they are going to incur yet more court costs as they will not win the case.

This isn't the last story of an incorrect persecution by FCC.

In fact, they reward some staff who act incorrectly. The RPI who harassed jonmorris0844 has been promoted, and is now a driver! If someone acted that way in many other industries, they'd have been disciplined.

 

[jon0844]

In fact, they reward some staff who act incorrectly. The RPI who harassed jonmorris0844 has been promoted, and is now a driver! If someone acted that way in many other industries, they'd have been disciplined.

We don't know if he has actually become a driver, only that he was training to become one.

I would love to find out how he's getting on, so if there are any FCC drivers (on the TL side, north of St Pancras) that want to ask me privately for his name, maybe we can find out?!

 

[philjo]

'DISC' tickets should not be that uncommon on FCC. If you book through websites such as East Coast, and select postal delivery, the tickets often have "DISC" printed on them. Many people must book journeys from EC stations to FCC stations, and some of them will surely book online and get tickets posted!

I have booked an advance single from the EC website for travel from Windermere to Letchworth (via Lancaster, Leeds & stevenage) which is marked DISC.
(though the FCC section in this case is also covered by my season ticket but as fare was the same as that to Stevenage I book it to cover the whole journey anyway)

 

[snail]

Not to mention talk of 'fines'...

If you look back to the opening post, the OP calls it a 'fine'. She probably said the same to the journalist.

Shoddy, yes, but that's the way the public perceive penalties in these circumstances.

 

[Ferret]

If you look back to the opening post, the OP calls it a 'fine'. She probably said the same to the journalist.

Shoddy, yes, but that's the way the public perceive penalties in these circumstances.

Oh I totally agree. Still about par for the course where UK journalism is concerned though...

 

[jon0844]

When a lot of rail staff also call them fines, I think we are never going to succeed in convincing everyone otherwise!

Has any thread on here had someone refer to their PF as a penalty fare? If so, I bet it hadn't been many.

 

[Ferret]

When a lot of rail staff also call them fines, I think we are never going to succeed in convincing everyone otherwise!

Has any thread on here had someone refer to their PF as a penalty fare? If so, I bet it hadn't been many.

There's the odd one. Still, my moan about this journalist goes far deeper than just not knowing the difference between a fine and a PF....

 

[yorkie]

I have booked an advance single from the EC website for travel from Windermere to Letchworth (via Lancaster, Leeds & stevenage) which is marked DISC.
(though the FCC section in this case is also covered by my season ticket but as fare was the same as that to Stevenage I book it to cover the whole journey anyway)

Could you write to FCC asking them what steps they have taken to ensure their staff will not ask you for a Railcard and charge you a Penalty Fare? I'd be interested to read their response.