I've got to travel, I have a family member taken ill

[Flamingo]

I've had quite a few passengers lately either on Advanced Tickets or solo on a group-save ticket saying that they had a sick granny/parent/child, and they had to travel on an earlier train (or their colleague has been called away for that reason). Some have got quite aggressive about it. The best was the two in South Wales who were obviously on their way home after an all-nighter in a club, saying that they had to get home as one of their auntie's had been killed in the Tsunami in Japan (they were kicked off).

Now, if it was me and it was a situation like that, I'd be prepared to pay any amount, figuring the priority would be to get home.

Some I did charge, some I didn't depending on my gut feeling from their body language and general demeanor. Looking back, I probably should have charged them all.

Who feels it is unreasonable to charge anybody up if this excuse is given, and why?

 

[scotsman]

Take all circumstances into account, ask a few questions. Their name, how old they are, where they come from, what's happened. It may seem callous, but you'll be able to ascertain whether they are genuine from the response. If you feel they are, apologise for asking and explain why.

 

[Flamingo]

That's what I have been doing. Maybe I'm just getting hard and cynical, but I'm getting more inclined to go down the "not my problem" route, as I'm getting more and more who seem to think it's a "cover-all" excuse.

 

[Mike395]

I agree with scotsman, it depends on the circumstances - for example (assuming I was a guard or RPI), I would be far more likely to not charge 2 people clearly dressed up for a funeral than a teenager saying a mate of theirs is in hospital (not saying the latter case is not possible, but I would certainly be asking many more questions before letting them off!)

 

[Flamingo]

It's easy to say that exceptions should be made, but on reflection, I'm not sure if my point is a bit more about people taking responsibility for themselves.

Why should it be the responsibility of a TOC to provide discounted travel facilities for somebody to get home because of personal difficulties? We do have a facility in place (UPFN or permit to travel from manned ticket offices) in genuine cases of distress / inability to pay.

 

[island]

I agree with most of the above: question politely to assess for genuineness, then charge/UPFN as appropriate. A UPFN makes it head office's problem to assess.

 

[Captain Chaos]

If I believe someone is using it as an excuse then I often ask which hospital and ward they are in and then offer to ring up the hospital to tell them that they are on their way to see them. Their tune quite suddenly changes then.

If I feel that they are genuine then I am willing to overlook it. Depends on the circumstances really. I have always had the policy whereby if you come and tell me before you get on the train that you haven't got the money etc then it's not a problem. Even if you are on the train but you are making an effort to come and find me I am ok with. It's when people just sit there and 'expect' you to do them a favour I have an issue with.

 

[cyclebytrain]

Seems a bit suspicious to me. From my personal experience, when I had to unexpectedly travel to visit a relative in hospital, the last thing I did before I left home was to make certain I had every credit/debit card I possessed and my emergency cash in my wallet because I didn't know what was going to happen, where I'd be sleeping that night etc -but I knew that it was probably going to be a very expensive day (and it was).

However, I think that if you had no money, you'd probably chance it rather than ask first -if you asked before you got on the train and got a no, you'd be stuffed whereas you might not be caught -and if you were thrown off the train, you would almost certainly be closer to where you needed to be than where you started

 

[Failed Unit]

To be honest, I use APs a lot on business, if something bad happened I would pay to get back. Considering APs can be changed the night before it doesn't really cut much mustard with me. It has happened to me back in GNER days, I had booked to see a friend at the weekend, he got much worse and I needed to go that day. £108 (then off peak return fare between Edinburgh and London) seemed a very small price to say goodbye in person. Considering the other options both flying and driving would have cost me nearly double!

 

[Flamingo]

To be honest, I use APs a lot on business, if something bad happened I would pay to get back. Considering APs can be changed the night before it doesn't really cut much mustard with me. It has happened to me back in GNER days, I had booked to see a friend at the weekend, he got much worse and I needed to go that day. £108 (then off peak return fare between Edinburgh and London) seemed a very small price to say goodbye in person. Considering the other options both flying and driving would have cost me nearly double!

That is pretty much my chain of thought. If your granny / child is seriously ill, then you'd pay whatever.

(All I usually do is excess up plus the £10, I'm not talking about full open singles here by the way!)

 

[LexyBoy]

I’d agree that most people wouldn’t worry about paying for travel as their primary concern would be getting to wherever they have to travel ASAP. In some cases of course the customer won’t be able to pay, such as where they were only able to travel due to a heavily discounted AP fare. I don’t know how many people know that ticket offices can arrange for remote payment or issue a UPFN, but I’d think it would be very few – thus I can see why many would chance it on an Advance fare, hoping their story would get them by.

The problem of course is that giving such an emotive reason for travelling without a valid ticket makes the guard/RPI/whoever look pretty bad if they are harsh on the customer, which makes it an attractive strategy for those deliberately trying it on. I think that staff should therefore be sympathetic (unless they truly don’t believe the story) but still ask for payment (as a UPFN if appropriate). Perhaps they could sell a SOS to the next stop plus the appropriate Off-Peak fare for the completion of their journey – the revenue would then be the same as if they had got off to buy a ticket to finish their journey, but without forcing them to wait longer. (edit: or as Flamingo says, excess + admin fee, which seems eminently reasonable to me)

With AP fares, I’d think that most genuine emergency cases would be forced to travel at a very different time or day from their booked train – I’d be extremely suspicious if they were on a train an hour after their booked one, for example.

This situation (indirectly) happened to me a while ago. Three of us had travelled with FGW on GroupSave, and over the course of the weekend one of the party had to travel back for family reasons. Realising the GroupSave tickets weren’t valid if separated, he left the return portion with us and bought a new ticket (at a sensible price, thanks to FGW for not having rip-off singles ). The two of us returning on (all three) GPS-3 tickets didn’t have any problems on explaining what happened.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I've had quite a few passengers lately either on Advanced Tickets or solo on a group-save ticket saying that they had a sick granny/parent/child, and they had to travel on an earlier train (or their colleague has been called away for that reason). Some have got quite aggressive about it. The best was the two in South Wales who were obviously on their way home after an all-nighter in a club, saying that they had to get home as one of their auntie's had been killed in the Tsunami in Japan (they were kicked off).

Now, if it was me and it was a situation like that, I'd be prepared to pay any amount, figuring the priority would be to get home.

Some I did charge, some I didn't depending on my gut feeling from their body language and general demeanor. Looking back, I probably should have charged them all.

Who feels it is unreasonable to charge anybody up if this excuse is given, and why?

I've not had many of these recently. I have however had an increasingly large number of Adults (sometimes groups of Adults) using FAM discounted tickets but even though they have the railcard with them, they have no child travelling with them. Each claimed that the child was ill and couldn't travel. The most popular excuse for Advance tickets on the wrong train - either earlier or later - is "well the bloke on the station said they were valid on any train".

 

[Failed Unit]

I've not had many of these recently. I have however had an increasingly large number of Adults (sometimes groups of Adults) using FAM discounted tickets but even though they have the railcard with them, they have no child travelling with them.

This is one rule I would like to see clarified and documented to the public. I have seen a statement saying that taking the child to school etc is permitted, so you have the child with you outward but no child on the return. But I have never being brave enough to do this as I don't have a public document to back this up should someone try and penalty fare me. I don't think a printout of the statement from this forum will help me

 

[MikeWh]

This is one rule I would like to see clarified and documented to the public. I have seen a statement saying that taking the child to school etc is permitted, so you have the child with you outward but no child on the return. But I have never being brave enough to do this as I don't have a public document to back this up should someone try and penalty fare me. I don't think a printout of the statement from this forum will help me

I remembered seeing this a while back, so I went searching. I found a thread which seemed to be the one, and the last post was quite interesting. Failed Unit said he was going to ask East Coast via a FOI request what the current size of group regulations say. Did you ever ask? What did they say?

 

[Failed Unit]

I remembered seeing this a while back, so I went searching. I found a thread which seemed to be the one, and the last post was quite interesting. Failed Unit said he was going to ask East Coast via a FOI request what the current size of group regulations say. Did you ever ask? What did they say?

I got fobbed off, I should really chase them up, but I will wait until the complaints about the new "first class" offer die down first!

 

[FGWman]

This is one rule I would like to see clarified and documented to the public. I have seen a statement saying that taking the child to school etc is permitted, so you have the child with you outward but no child on the return. But I have never being brave enough to do this as I don't have a public document to back this up should someone try and penalty fare me. I don't think a printout of the statement from this forum will help me

The adult can never travel on their own. What is allowed but little known about is that a child may travel on a discounted ticket with an adult on the full price. So an adult can drop the child somewhere and then return on their own.

Qutied from the fares manual :-

The group, whatever the size, must stay together throughout the journey as the Family & Friends Railcard validates all tickets. The only exception is for the purpose of allowing parents to take children to, or collect them from, for example, school or hospital,i.e. the adult(s) make one leg of a return journey without children. In which case the Railcard holder(s) with their Railcard and an undiscounted return ticket of the type normally only available with a Family & Friends Railcard and up to four children each holding a Child’s discounted price Single ticket for the journey being made by the Railcard holder(s) is allowed.

 

[Failed Unit]

Thanks, that is a lot more clear and understandable now.

 

[bb21]

The adult can never travel on their own. What is allowed but little known about is that a child may travel on a discounted ticket with an adult on the full price. So an adult can drop the child somewhere and then return on their own.

Qutied from the fares manual :-

The group, whatever the size, must stay together throughout the journey as the Family & Friends Railcard validates all tickets. The only exception is for the purpose of allowing parents to take children to, or collect them from, for example, school or hospital,i.e. the adult(s) make one leg of a return journey without children. In which case the Railcard holder(s) with their Railcard and an undiscounted return ticket of the type normally only available with a Family & Friends Railcard and up to four children each holding a Child’s discounted price Single ticket for the journey being made by the Railcard holder(s) is allowed.

I think this bit of quote confirms what John @ Home said in the other (linked) thread. You learn something everyday.

 

[Flamingo]

That's good to know!

 

[trainophile]

Just out of interest, if you buy two adult tickets but then one adult can't travel so you take a child instead (on the adult ticket) is this okay? I know it obviously wouldn't be allowed the other way round i.e. adult travelling on child ticket.

 

[Mike395]

Just out of interest, if you buy two adult tickets but then one adult can't travel so you take a child instead (on the adult ticket) is this okay? I know it obviously wouldn't be allowed the other way round i.e. adult travelling on child ticket.

Dont think there would be a problem - I can just see the Daily Mail headline now "Child denied travel on adult ticket" and a HUGE amount of negative publicity for the railway if it ever happened!

 

[trainophile]

Dont think there would be a problem - I can just see the Daily Mail headline now "Child denied travel on adult ticket" and a HUGE amount of negative publicity for the railway if it ever happened!

It sounds daft, but then so does short finishing on an AP ticket. Dem's da rules!

 

[Flamingo]

Just out of interest, if you buy two adult tickets but then one adult can't travel so you take a child instead (on the adult ticket) is this okay? I know it obviously wouldn't be allowed the other way round i.e. adult travelling on child ticket.

Yea, that's fine! We don't mind if you pay more than you needed to

 

[sheff1]

Seems a bit suspicious to me. From my personal experience, when I had to unexpectedly travel to visit a relative in hospital, the last thing I did before I left home was to make certain I had every credit/debit card I possessed and my emergency cash in my wallet because I didn't know what was going to happen, where I'd be sleeping that night etc -but I knew that it was probably going to be a very expensive day (and it was).

However, I think that if you had no money, you'd probably chance it rather than ask first -if you asked before you got on the train and got a no, you'd be stuffed whereas you might not be caught -and if you were thrown off the train, you would almost certainly be closer to where you needed to be than where you started

This

I think the only fair way is to charge everyone (or UPFN for those with no money).

 

[strange6]

Follow the rules. Simple With all due respect, you're there to do a job; not be a charity worker!

 

[Flamingo]

Follow the rules. Simple With all due respect, you're there to do a job; not be a charity worker!

Tell that to; 1. The headline writers in the Daily Mail and; 2. My boss, who reacts with horror whenever a complaint hits his desk.

Also, I feel that there is something morally wrong with charging someone a few hundred pounds just because their railcard is 24 hours out of date

 

[strange6]

Tell that to; 1. The headline writers in the Daily Mail and; 2. My boss, who reacts with horror whenever a complaint hits his desk.

Also, I feel that there is something morally wrong with charging someone a few hundred pounds just because their railcard is 24 hours out of date

I have every sympathy my friend, but if you follow the rules, that's your **** covered. You have to look out for number 1 in this world! If you follow the rules, your boss can't do a damn thing about it. And as for the railcard then tough titty; it's your responsibility to make sure it's valid. You wouldn't get any sympathy from the police if your insurance certificate was 24 hours out of date!

 

[SS4]

I have every sympathy my friend, but if you follow the rules, that's your **** covered. You have to look out for number 1 in this world! If you follow the rules, your boss can't do a damn thing about it. And as for the railcard then tough titty; it's your responsibility to make sure it's valid. You wouldn't get any sympathy from the police if your insurance certificate was 24 hours out of date!

Agreed, at the end of the day you have to keep yourself in a job.

If I got my name printed in the Daily Mail for being (in their opinion) a complete tool then I'd be tempted to walk down the street waving a red flag for good measure

 

[Flamingo]

Believe me, I know from bitter experience that I have had a lot more **** from managers for (correctly) selling tickets to people who subsequently complained than I ever had from managers for NOT selling tickets.

 

[Ticket Man]

this thread has just taken me back to sunday morning when hoards of footy fans used the same excuse to try and get home after a certain 3-1 defeat the night before.
I was informed of no less than 11 sick/injured MOP's that desperately needed hung over relatives to attend to them.

I found it hard to sympathise with bright red eyes and stella breath