Prosecution from Arriva Trains Wales

[WelshKarl]

Hi all,

Looking for a bit of help & advice to do with alledged fare evasion on the Arriva network.

Last month a friend of mine was boarding his now regular morning train for a job he recently started, on this occasion he was running late and was running towards the station as the train arrived in. This station has recently been fitted with a self-serve ticket machine and i'm aware / concerned they can argue he should have bought a ticket and waited for the next train.

On the train there was no sign of a conductor or an opportunity to buy tickets at this point.

He arrived at his destination which he knows to be a staffed station and made his way towards the queue to buy his ticket. Walking down the platform to the queue a woman came up to him flashing a name badge asking if he had a ticket, to which he politely advised no he hadn't yet, she asked him where he was travelling from which she then shouted over to another guy, then he spoke to him. There were 3 of them there in total, two out of the 3 staff spoke very poor english (not at all a racially motivated point, he just found them exceptionally hard to understand) and all made him feel very intimidated. They then pointed out that he obviously needed a ticket and pointed him to the booth he was already heading towards. Once in the queue two of them then approached him while motioning to a new third person who brings a clipboard and removes him from the queue to take all his details and advise that he'll be receiving a letter.

The letter he has now received advises that he was spoken to by revenue protection staff for failing to produce a valid ticket and requesting a statement of events from him before it goes to a magistrates court (well, it says their prosecutions team is considering it). It also says they have evidence to warrant presecution.

Both stations are fitted with CCTV as the national rail website confirms, would it be worth asking them to review both sets of CCTV to see he actually had to run for the train and get on, and then once arrived attempted to buy a ticket from the office.

What really bothers me is he showed full intent to buying a ticket, he was making his way to buy one, he was told by on site staff to queue for one, and was in a queue to buy one when removed. What about all the people infront of him in this queue that didn't have a ticket but were allowed to buy one? Is it unreasonable to think that because he's young / looks the type that isn't going to defend himself that they chose to impose this on him? Between the encounter at the station between the many staff and this letter he's being wrongly made out to be a criminal which is absolutely not the case and couldn't be further from his character.

He spends a fortune on rail fare, regularly uses these two stations and has never been in ANY sort of trouble before with any railway company.

Does anyone have any advice of what he can do / what we can put in the statement letter?

Any and all help is really appreciated.

Thanks,

Karl

 

[bb21]

This station has recently been fitted with a self-serve ticket machine and i'm aware / concerned they can argue he should have bought a ticket and waited for the next train.

... which is exactly what he should have done.

On the train there was no sign of a conductor or an opportunity to buy tickets at this point.

He has already ignored an opportunity to pay at his origin station. Running late is unfortunately not a valid reason for not buying a ticket before boarding.

It also says they have evidence to warrant presecution.

Yes, they do. He has failed to present a valid ticket when requested (despite having had an opportunity to pay, at the origin station), which is a breach of the Railway Byelaws.

Both stations are fitted with CCTV as the national rail website confirms, would it be worth asking them to review both sets of CCTV to see he actually had to run for the train and get on, and then once arrived attempted to buy a ticket from the office.

This will only confirm the fact that he ignored an opportunity at the origin station.

What really bothers me is he showed full intent to buying a ticket, he was making his way to buy one, he was told by on site staff to queue for one, and was in a queue to buy one when removed. What about all the people infront of him in this queue that didn't have a ticket but were allowed to buy one?

Intent is only required to be proven for a Regulation of Railways Act prosecution, with an associated criminal record if convicted. It is not required for a Byelaw prosecution, conviction under which should not result in a criminal record. Of course we have no way of telling you which one it will be at this stage, but it is likely that it will be under the Byelaws unless there are other incriminating factors.

Is it unreasonable to think that because he's young / looks the type that isn't going to defend himself that they chose to impose this on him? Between the encounter at the station between the many staff and this letter he's being wrongly made out to be a criminal which is absolutely not the case and couldn't be further from his character.

I don't think this is at all relevant in a Byelaw prosecution. Pure speculation.

He spends a fortune on rail fare, regularly uses these two stations and has never been in ANY sort of trouble before with any railway company.

Again, not really relevant in this case, if a Byelaw prosecution is brought about. What this would mean is that he is unlikely to end up with the most severe punishment should he be convicted as it is not a repeat offence.

Does anyone have any advice of what he can do / what we can put in the statement letter?

Be honest about what happened, and apologise about the mistake. Unless there are other mitigating factors then I can't see anything from what you have described which would get your friend out of this situation. In these situations, should he wish to avoid a day in court, we do advise that he offers to settle out of court. The train company, however, are not obliged to accept a settlement.

 

[34D]

He spends a fortune on rail fare, regularly uses these two stations and has never been in ANY sort of trouble before with any railway company.

Does anyone have any advice of what he can do / what we can put in the statement letter?

Any and all help is really appreciated.

Thanks,

Karl

Why no monthly or annual season then

Or is this a regular thing he does?

(I'm ploayoing devils advocate here)

 

[Rich McLean]

Why no monthly or annual season then

Or is this a regular thing he does?

(I'm ploayoing devils advocate here)

Some people don't know how to go about buying a season ticket (my sister for one)

 

[Fare-Cop]

Some people don't know how to go about buying a season ticket (my sister for one)

Why not ask at the arrival station, which I assume has a ticket office, or ask staff on the station / train to explain then?

In simple terms, take a recent passport sized photograph to a staffed ticket office, enquire the price for the journey that you wish to make and for any period from one month to one year.

If the individual is travelling say 5 days a week for work, then substantial savings will be made and if necessary, weekly tickets can also be a further option. A weekly is valid for any seven consecutive days and even if not travelling at weekends, may work out cheaper than daily tickets.

 

[Rich McLean]

Why not ask at the arrival station, which I assume has a ticket office, or ask staff on the station / train to explain then?

In simple terms, take a recent passport sized photograph to a staffed ticket office, enquire the price for the journey that you wish to make and for any period from one month to one year.

If the individual is travelling say 5 days a week for work, then substantial savings will be made and if necessary, weekly tickets can also be a further option. A weekly is valid for any seven consecutive days and even if not travelling at weekends, may work out cheaper than daily tickets.

She knows this now as I got the info for her, but making a point that there are passengers out there that dont know

 

[bb21]

Back to the original topic. The OP did not say whether his friends' journeys are regular enough to warrant a season ticket, so it may not offer better value.

 

[Fare-Cop]

She knows this now as I got the info for her, but making a point that there are passengers out there that dont know

Understood, and I apologise if my post seemed offensive in any way, but I always have difficulty when the 'I didn't know' defence is offered because I cannot see why so many find it so hard to find the information that is so freely available these days.

At the very worst, if a traveller notices a season ticket exists, and if they are regular commuters they must see them used daily, what is hard about actually saying to someone who shows one, 'Excuse me, but I see you use a season ticket and would like to get one, can you tell me how I go about it?'

I'm sorry if anyone thinks that is inappropriate, I guess that if it is then we really do live in an antisocial society.

Back to the original topic. The OP did not say whether his friends' journeys are regular enough to warrant a season ticket, so it may not offer better value.

Yes bb21, you will see that my original post did emphasise by underlining and emboldening the word may in relation to savings

 

[nw1]

This is very, very sad - to prosecute someone who was obviously not trying to deliberately dodge the fare.

But my guess is the member of staff was scared at being sacked for not following "policy", hence what sounds like heavy-handed action. There's too much of inflexible "policy" in the world these days, there's this obsession with "policy" and "treating everyone the same" whether they have dishonest intent or not, and this is not just in the railways but in other areas which I have more knowledge of. The number one curse of today, litigation, is doubtless at the root of this. A much better "policy" would be to allow people who are obviously not dodging just to let them buy the ticket, or at worst, charge a penalty fare.

 

[bb21]

A much better "policy" would be to allow people who are obviously not dodging just to let them buy the ticket, or at worst, charge a penalty fare.

Please tell me how the RPI can tell whether the passenger decided to buy a ticket because he saw them there, or that he had always intended to buy one, in the situation described above.

The current system is not perfect, and I certainly don't agree with much of it, but in the circumstances described by the OP, there really isn't anyone else to blame. Buying a ticket before boarding really isn't a difficult concept.

 

[Andrewlong]

This is very, very sad - to prosecute someone who was obviously not trying to deliberately dodge the fare.

But my guess is the member of staff was scared at being sacked for not following "policy", hence what sounds like heavy-handed action. There's too much of inflexible "policy" in the world these days, there's this obsession with "policy" and "treating everyone the same" whether they have dishonest intent or not, and this is not just in the railways but in other areas which I have more knowledge of. The number one curse of today, litigation, is doubtless at the root of this. A much better "policy" would be to allow people who are obviously not dodging just to let them buy the ticket, or at worst, charge a penalty fare.

I think what was worse was he was directed to the ticket office and then RP changed their mind and decided to put him through the 'process'. RP had they decided to be helpful could have even sold him a ticket there and then and told him not to do this again/look into a season ticket.

The whole business about boarding trains without ticket is confusing to the travelling public. You can buy a ticket on my SWT service from the guard or the excess fares window at Reading but if you are caught by RPI you are potentially in trouble. I saw RPI in operation on a rush hour FGW train and it was demeaning for the passenger.

 

[yorkie]

... which is exactly what he should have done....

...IF he was paying by a payment method accepted by the machine.

Why no monthly or annual season then :-?

There are reasons why a monthly or annual (!!) may not be an option. I think a fairer question might be "why no weekly?"

The idea that Season tickets are amazing value is utterly flawed, and skewed by comparisons with extreme commutes such as Swindon-London where the daft Anytime is compared. In the real world, meanwhile...

Well, for one thing, he could be a Railcard holder. If so, it would be cheaper to buy 5 x daily return tickets.

Or perhaps he only travels 3 times a week. That would also be cheaper to buy separate tickets compared to a Weekly.

Why not ask at the arrival station, which I assume has a ticket office

A dangerous assumption to make. Not many of the stations in that area have ticket offices.

But my guess is the member of staff was scared at being sacked for not following "policy", hence what sounds like heavy-handed action. ...

They are agency staff. We've had trouble with them before. Their lack of knowledge is even more appalling than their attitude and they have been found attempting to entrap passengers who had done nothing wrong.

It would not surprise me at all if they were standing in front of a ticket selling opportunity, and catching people who were, in fact, going to pay.

If ATW want to do revenue protection activities, they should bring it 'in-house', do it properly and stop getting cowboys to entrap people and do their dirty work for them.

Remember this thread? Daughter approached by revenue officers on board train the disgraceful agency staff were very much in the wrong, and the OP won in the end.

 

[bb21]

...IF he was paying by a payment method accepted by the machine.

Good point.

@OP. What was the intended method of payment?

 

[hluraven]

This is very, very sad - to prosecute someone who was obviously not trying to deliberately dodge the fare.

But my guess is the member of staff was scared at being sacked for not following "policy", hence what sounds like heavy-handed action. There's too much of inflexible "policy" in the world these days, there's this obsession with "policy" and "treating everyone the same" whether they have dishonest intent or not, and this is not just in the railways but in other areas which I have more knowledge of. The number one curse of today, litigation, is doubtless at the root of this. A much better "policy" would be to allow people who are obviously not dodging just to let them buy the ticket, or at worst, charge a penalty fare.

By this logic, all anyone ever has to do is turn up "late" for their train, and only by a ticket if physically forced to do so at the other end. If they are stopped, they just say "I was going to buy a ticket" and pay the minimum, if not stopped they walk away without paying. I'm fairly sure revenue would drop significantly if this came in, leaving the remaining honest passengers with higher fares to make up the shortfall.

 

[yorkie]

hluraven - actually nickw1 is correct in that people who simply turn up late but intend to buy on-board (on trains where this is custom & practice) would normally be sold a ticket (at the Anytime rate, with no Railcard discounts if applicable) except in this case, if the OP was paying by cash or rail travel voucher in which case the full range of fares would be available.

Assuming we've been told the truth, there appears to be no intent here, so providing the passenger gets a good enough solicitor, any attempt by ATW to prosecute under the Regulation of Railways Act should fail.

So that leaves ATW with the option to prosecute under a 'strict liability' basis (ie, no intent). They could do that (but then the passenger would have a valid defence if they intended to pay by cash) but morally, it stinks.

But this moral argument isn't going to be of much use in this thread, and until further information on this specific case comes to light, there's nothing much that can be said. I've sent the OP a PM.

 

[Fare-Cop]

hluraven - actually nickw1 is correct in that people who simply turn up late but intend to buy on-board (on trains where this is custom & practice) would normally be sold a ticket (at the Anytime rate, with no Railcard discounts if applicable) except in this case, if the OP was paying by cash or rail travel voucher in which case the full range of fares would be available..

I would agree with you Yorkie, if it were not for the fact that ATW have been widely reported as taking a harder line and have put new signs and posters all over their system advising the need for travellers to pay before boarding where you can, or risk prosecution.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I would agree with you Yorkie, if it were not for the fact that ATW have been widely reported as taking a harder line and have put new signs and posters all over their system advising the need for travellers to pay before boarding where you can, or risk prosecution.

They have also put up these posters at stations where you can't buy a ticket before boarding, which I think is a little silly! Especially if someone isn't used to travelling by train before, they may be worried about boarding despite the fact that buying on board is how you have to do it in those locations!

 

[Starmill]

Thank goodness somebody mentioned payment method. If its a card only TVM and the OP paid cash, perfectly valid defense IMO.

 

[Squaddie]

Thank goodness somebody mentioned payment method. If its a card only TVM and the OP paid cash, perfectly valid defense IMO.

Except that it would not be truthful, as the OP has stated that his friend made no attempt to buy a ticket at the start of his journey:

Last month a friend of mine was boarding his now regular morning train for a job he recently started, on this occasion he was running late and was running towards the station as the train arrived in. This station has recently been fitted with a self-serve ticket machine and i'm aware / concerned they can argue he should have bought a ticket and waited for the next train.

 

[island]

Not to mention the fact that the law does not provide a defense of wanting to pay by a method the machine doesn't accept, but that's opening a huge can of worms...

 

[RPI]

One important point is that ATW do have warning notices on all of their timetable posters and some stand alone warning posters advising that you can be prosecuted if you don't buy before you board

 

[Flamingo]

There are new posters in Cardiff Central giving details of the fines the courts are handing out as well.

 

[Starmill]

There are new posters in Cardiff Central giving details of the fines the courts are handing out as well.

There are very silly posters and leaflets all over South Wales, on posters, in timetables, on trains and even dedicated 'fake' Penalty Fare leaflets. They are for the most part, dubiously worded and seem only intended to scare.

 

[Flamingo]

There are very silly posters and leaflets all over South Wales, on posters, in timetables, on trains and even dedicated 'fake' Penalty Fare leaflets. They are for the most part, dubiously worded and seem only intended to scare.

Not before time, fare evasion is rife and blatent in Wales. They need scareing :@

 

[Fare-Cop]

There are very silly posters and leaflets all over South Wales, on posters, in timetables, on trains and even dedicated 'fake' Penalty Fare leaflets. They are for the most part, dubiously worded and seem only intended to scare.

Two things spring to mind.

Firstly, so far as I am aware Penalty Fares do not apply to any lines in South Wales and in what sense do you think their posters are 'dubiously worded'?

 

[Greenback]

It is correct that there are no Penalty Fares in South Wales. It is also correct that ATW have put posters up telling people they have to buy before boarding except then there are no facilities to dos o, when they must buy at the first available opportunity.

It does appear that they are following the example of Northern in trying to change the mindset of some people that they only need to buy a ticket if they are challenged.

 

[67018]

It does appear that they are following the example of Northern in trying to change the mindset of some people that they only need to buy a ticket if they are challenged.

I've noticed that this is starting to happen in the Birmingham area as well - both posters and recorded PA announcements advising people to buy before boarding or at the first opportunity - at least at Birmingham Snow Hill and Smethwick Galton Bridge. Is this part of a co-ordinated campaign or just coincidence?

 

[Rhydgaled]

... which is exactly what he should have done.

He has already ignored an opportunity to pay at his origin station. Running late is unfortunately not a valid reason for not buying a ticket before boarding.

Even if you are late because a 'connecting' bus service is delayed and there's not another train for two hours (or more) and waiting for it would make you miss the appointment/work you were trying to get to)?

My interpretation of 'first available oppertunity' in such a case would be on the train, since you didn't have a oppertunity (time) to buy a ticket before catching that particular train.

What should you actually do in such a suituation? Give up, get back on the bus and go home?

 

[bb21]

Even if you are late because a 'connecting' bus service is delayed and there's not another train for two hours (or more) and waiting for it would make you miss the appointment/work you were trying to get to)?

...

What should you actually do in such a suituation? Give up, get back on the bus and go home?

A bus service in the general sense is not regarded as part of your railway journey unfortunately. There are some exceptions, but generally speaking being delayed on a bus is of no concern to the railways. (Of course I believe that it should be, for the sake of integrated transport, amongst other reasons, but there is no point in me telling you what I think should happen here. That is for another time.)

It is a bit of a tricky situation. What I would do in such a situation is to speak to the guard before boarding (assuming that there is a commercial guard onboard), and so far I have never been told no. There is of course no guarantee but most guards are understanding and would use their discretion in such cases.

If there is not a commercial guard onboard, or if the service is DOO, then I think strictly speaking you break the Byelaws if you board without a ticket, with potentially serious consequences as things currently stand. (Are there DOO services where trains are less frequent than hourly?)

My interpretation of 'first available oppertunity' in such a case would be on the train, since you didn't have a oppertunity (time) to buy a ticket before catching that particular train.

No, that is incorrect.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Even if you are late because a 'connecting' bus service is delayed and there's not another train for two hours (or more) and waiting for it would make you miss the appointment/work you were trying to get to)?

A bus service is only a 'connecting' service if it is shown as such on a railway timetable. If a traveller books a taxi to take them to the station and that taxi is late, it is not the responsibility of the rail company and the same applies to the bus.

Arriving late for the train you wanted to catch, or not wanting to queue to get a ticket, are not reasons to board a train without paying if facilities are available.

Like bb21, I wish there were a fully integrated public transport system, but that is just not the case.

My interpretation of 'first available oppertunity' in such a case would be on the train, since you didn't have a oppertunity (time) to buy a ticket before catching that particular train.

The first opportunity to get a ticket is always on arrival at the station if there are working facilities available to the traveller there. I know that there may be extenuating circumstances where queues may exceed the times aimed for in Charter documents, but regrettably, these aims are just that, a hoped for standard and are not legally binding. Byelaws are however a different matter. 'Opportunity to do something 'and 'time to do something' are not the same thing at all.

In the case of ATW and some other TOCs, I believe that there are conductor guards on every train, but that doesn't make it OK to board without getting a ticket if facilities are available. The commercial duty of those staff is to provide a facility to get a ticket for travellers who have genuinely boarded at stations where there were no facilities, it is not to seek out those who haven't paid when they could have done so.

A further duty, considered more important in most cases, will be to observe travellers joining and alighting do so safely before checking the doors and signalling right-away. This means that the guard will invariably be visible on, or from the platform.

In my experience, if a traveller arriving late goes straight to that guard and says 'Sorry, but my bus was late and need to get this train to get to work on time, can I get a ticket from you please?' the answer will rarely be anything other than 'Yes'.

On the other hand, if the traveller considers that getting a seat and just paying the fare if someone comes along and asks is more important to them, they should not be surprised if this results in a report for breach of byelaw, or an allegation of intent to avoid a fare by way of intending to pay only if challenged.

If the same traveller is observed doing it almost daily, the information may well be reported by guards to inspectors as 'someone worth looking out for' because the question in mind will be, why doesn't s/he buy a weekly, or a season.

What should you actually do in such a suituation? Give up, get back on the bus and go home?

In the extremely unlikely case if the guard refuses access to the train I suppose catching the next train is the answer I'm afraid, although I really cannot see any guard who has been asked politely saying 'No' can you.

As a matter of interest, where is it that the service you suggest is so infrequent as to be more than two-hourly on a line where it might be used by someone going to work?