Signatures on railcards

[Ediswan]

I recently renewed my senior railcard (plastic, no photo). As per the conditions, it said NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED. So I signed it.

What purpose does this serve ? Do staff ever ask a passenger to reproduce the signature ? Do they even look at the signature ?

 

[swt_passenger]

I recently renewed my senior railcard (plastic, no photo). As per the conditions, it said NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED. So I signed it.

What purpose does this serve ? Do staff ever ask a passenger to reproduce the signature ? Do they even look at the signature ?

The purpose is underneath the signature box - you’re agreeing to the T&C

 

[island]

Agreeing to the T&C, and for non-photo Railcards in theory you can be asked for a sample signature to be checked against the signature on the card if there is doubt that the card belongs to you.

 

[Buzby]

The purpose is underneath the signature box - you’re agreeing to the T&C

Absolutely pointless then (as you’ve already agreed to the T&Cs by providing the vendor with the requisite funds to purchase the card). I’ve never signed any of the cards I purchased, it’s in my wallet and never been removed.

I’m sure we’d have heard of anyone being prosecuted for not signing their card by now - so I’d suggest it’s not worth bothering about, as they clearly don’t.

 

[MikeWM]

The back of Gold Cards has a line 'Issued only for use by M___________________'

That doesn't sound like it requires a signature, but it does look like something that is intended to be filled in with a name (and if so, filled in by whom)? It already says on the front who it was issued to, and matches the photocard, so what's that field for? Needless to say I've never filled it in.

 

[swt_passenger]

Absolutely pointless then (as you’ve already agreed to the T&Cs by providing the vendor with the requisite funds to purchase the card). I’ve never signed any of the cards I purchased, it’s in my wallet and never been removed.

I’m sure we’d have heard of anyone being prosecuted for not signing their card by now - so I’d suggest it’s not worth bothering about, as they clearly don’t.

I don’t really worry about signing them, I always did it when asked at the booking office when they were locally issued. That was usually just after he’d checked I’d signed the application form as well.

 

[island]

Absolutely pointless then (as you’ve already agreed to the T&Cs by providing the vendor with the requisite funds to purchase the card). I’ve never signed any of the cards I purchased, it’s in my wallet and never been removed.

Not if the card was purchased by someone else on your behalf.

I’m sure we’d have heard of anyone being prosecuted for not signing their card by now - so I’d suggest it’s not worth bothering about, as they clearly don’t.

I'd suggest it's not worth the risk of hassle by not signing it.

The back of Gold Cards has a line 'Issued only for use by M___________________'

That doesn't sound like it requires a signature, but it does look like something that is intended to be filled in with a name (and if so, filled in by whom)? It already says on the front who it was issued to, and matches the photocard, so what's that field for? Needless to say I've never filled it in.

That should be the name of the ticket holder. A blank for a name to be entered in used to traditionally be written M_____ as M is the first letter of the titles Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms. The railway has carried that forward although it is rarely seen elsewhere.

 

[Mainline421]

I've always signed mine immediately it's zero hassle, so why not? There was a case on here a while ago where staff tried to claim a (obvious loophole) ticket wasn't valid and confiscate the railcard on the basis it wasn't signed, fortunately it was just faded so they gave up if I recall correctly.

 

[MikeWM]

That should be the name of the ticket holder. A blank for a name to be entered in used to traditionally be written M_____ as M is the first letter of the titles Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms. The railway has carried that forward although it is rarely seen elsewhere.

Am I supposed to fill it in, or is it supposed to be filled in by the issuer, or neither? My name is already printed on the front, and on my linked photocard. It seems redundant, at best.

 

[rg177]

Years ago I recall a conductor on Northern service out of Barnsley obsessively checking for signed Railcards. He produced a pen for one passenger and had them sign it.

Nothing further happened, and I've never witnessed this behaviour ever again!

 

[DEFarnes]

I sign mine, just as I sign my credit and debit cards but inevitably they always rub off.

 

[RJ]

A ticket inspector on a train once attempted to withdraw my railcard on the basis of it not being signed. Unfortunately for them, they didn’t look at it properly. It had been signed and they had to go away with their tail between their legs.

Most people don’t bother and I’m not going to stop people using their railcard because they haven’t signed it, there are more productive ways to spend time.

 

[Buzby]

I sign mine, just as I sign my credit and debit cards but inevitably they always rub off.

Since the introduction of contactless, I stopped signing mine. It didn’t end up restricting my purchasing power As you note after 12 months it’s moot anyway!

 

[mikeg]

Since the introduction of contactless, I stopped signing mine. It didn’t end up restricting my purchasing power As you note after 12 months it’s moot anyway!

Not necessarily the wisest decision, fallbacks to signature verification can and do happen, although it's rare, it's usually when you're abroad in my experience. I work at a supermarket which has a lot of international clientele and unsigned cards cause us and their users no end of hassle (though some are chip and signature in the first place, Chinese students and American tourists seem to be the worst for having this problem).

 

[Haywain]

Not necessarily the wisest decision, fallbacks to signature verification can and do happen, although it's rare, it's usually when you're abroad in my experience. I work at a supermarket which has a lot of international clientele and unsigned cards cause us and their users no end of hassle (though some are chip and signature in the first place, Chinese students and American tourists seem to be the worst for having this problem).

Americans seem to be told not to sign their cards, which does cause problems here.

 

[trainophile]

On a related matter, I have just noticed some Advance tickets (paper CCSTs) that I collected recently have my surname printed at the top. If I were to buy a ticket for a friend, would the fact that the ticket has my name but their railcard is in a different name cause any problems?

 

[Buzby]

Does it say ‘Not Transferable’ on the reverse? If not, I don’t see how they could enforce it!

 

[Mainline421]

On a related matter, I have just noticed some Advance tickets (paper CCSTs) that I collected recently have my surname printed at the top. If I were to buy a ticket for a friend, would the fact that the ticket has my name but their railcard is in a different name cause any problems?

It's just the name of the person who paid for ToD, it's not like rovers or seasons.

 

[trainophile]

Does it say ‘Not Transferable’ on the reverse? If not, I don’t see how they could enforce it!

Doesn't seem to say anything to that effect on the ticket. Obviously the railcard is non transferable!

It's just the name of the person who paid for ToD, it's not like rovers or seasons.

That's okay then.

 

[OscarH]

Americans seem to be told not to sign their cards, which does cause problems here.

Seems especially odd given how behind they were adopting non swipe and sign payment!

 

[Haywain]

Seems especially odd given how behind they were adopting non swipe and sign payment!

Not so much when you consider that they tend to show a "drivers license" as identification including signature verification.