What do TOCs think of the advice offered on this Forum?

[MotCO]

I have been wondering recently how the TOCs view the advice given on this Forum to people seeking help and advice on ticket irregularity issues. This has also been highlighted in #174 of this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ng-ticket-enforcer.260977/page-6#post-6587499 where the TOC actually points a poster to this Forum. Do they:

1. Say 'Oh no', not another letter in the format suggested by @Hadders.
2. Think that it is useful to have a source of independent advice which endorses the penalties issued by the TOCs.
3. Throw their hands up in horror when the Forum points out that the Penalty Fares notices are not legal.

Do the TOCs see this Forum as nuisance or a positive thing?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Do the TOCs see this Forum as nuisance or a positive thing?

Suspect the former of the two, but perhaps we need a poll creating for this discussion topic?!

 

[fandroid]

I don't think much of point 3. occurs. They seem to be in absolutely no hurry to correct the invalid wording on Penalty Fare notices.

Intuitively, I'd think they are generally happy with most advice, which is overwhelmingly "engage, engage, engage"

Only TIL seem to be adopting weird time-wasting tactics, and that has little to do with our advice.

 

[Skymonster]

I think it not beyond the realm of possibility that tjis forum has contributed to the array of TOCs running extortion rackets / money making schemes offering fees as out of court settlements for ticketing irregularities, and maybe the recent evidence of an escalation of the fees demanded on some occasions. The forum may also be in part responsible for the increasing number of cases where TOCs are doing more research into a miscreants past travel history, both as part of an ongoing case and as follow up following settlement or a ”fishing expedition”. All it takes is for one TOC’s member of staff to read about what another TOC is doing…

 

[skyhigh]

All it takes is for one TOC’s member of staff to read about what another TOC is doing…

Do you really think they wouldn't talk to each other to find out what they're doing without this forum?

The forum may also be in part responsible for the increasing number of cases where TOCs are doing more research into a miscreants past travel history, both as part of an ongoing case and as follow up following settlement or a ”fishing expedition”.

I think the increasing level of smart ticketing and scanning data is probably the main reason for that.

 

[RPI]

I don't think they have a problem with it, management do view these forums, but the advice given is generally of benefit to both the TOC and the suspected offender as the general advice is to engage in the process, this saves time and money on both sides.

 

[Hadders]

I would imagine that most train companies are absolutely fine with the advice we provide on here.

Most people don't realise that railway ticketing offences are a criminal matter. We generally tell people who ask for our help what is likely to happen, and tell them what they need to do to sort it out. This is in everyone's interests - the train company sorts out a case more simply, the passenger gets the matter resolved and the railway almost always obtains more money than if the matter had ended up in court.

We had a thread recenly about the number of settlements offered by Northern and the number paid. Most went unpaid which would cause Northern far more time, effort and money to chase to out these cases through the court system.

Out of court settlements

A while ago we were discussing Out of Court Settlements and whether younger people were more often targeted with these. I said I could feel an FOI coming on, and I could. This is what I got back from Northern Trains: There's quite a lot to unpack from this. Firstly, I'm surprised at just how...

www.railforums.co.uk

We do, of course, like to make sure that Train Companies follow their own procedures as well as the law and it is rather satisfying when we can assist in getting these sort of cases resolved.

 

[Watershed]

I recently spoke with a solicitor dealing with criminal law who told me about having taken the wrong train (and TOC!) whilst holding an Advance ticket. They encountered RPIs during their journey but were let off for some reason. They had no idea that it was a criminal offence or that the outcome could be radically different depending on the TOC they were travelling on.

If even someone like that doesn't know that it's an offence, what chance does the average member of the public have?!

 

[Titfield]

Do you really think they wouldn't talk to each other to find out what they're doing without this forum?

I think the increasing level of smart ticketing and scanning data is probably the main reason for that.

To quote what Sir Edmund Hillary said when asked why he climbed Mount Everest " Because it is there".

I have no doubt that digital trails enable far more persistent fare evaders to be caught than hitherto. Presumably in the pre digital age when an evader walked out of the station at the end of their journey there was a sense of "I have got away it, its over" and no retrospective action could be taken.

 

[SargeNpton]

To quote what Sir Edmund Hillary said when asked why he climbed Mount Everest " Because it is there".

That quote is attributed to George Mallory.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I have no doubt that digital trails enable far more persistent fare evaders to be caught than hitherto. Presumably in the pre digital age when an evader walked out of the station at the end of their journey there was a sense of "I have got away it, its over" and no retrospective action could be taken.

And this has changed the risk/reward of habitual fare evasion adversely for fare dodgers.

As you say, in the past if you got away with 99 times before being caught, it could well be worth paying a fine on the 100th time. Now, with the digital trail that facilitates the fare dodging in the first place (eg buying a “short fare” online) you get landed with the cost for all the tickets you avoided.

 

[Titfield]

I would imagine that most train companies are absolutely fine with the advice we provide on here.

Most people don't realise that railway ticketing offences are a criminal matter. We generally tell people who ask for our help what is likely to happen, and tell them what they need to do to sort it out. This is in everyone's interests - the train company sorts out a case more simply, the passenger gets the matter resolved and the railway almost always obtains more money than if the matter had ended up in court.

We had a thread recenly about the number of settlements offered by Northern and the number paid. Most went unpaid which would cause Northern far more time, effort and money to chase to out these cases through the court system.

Out of court settlements

A while ago we were discussing Out of Court Settlements and whether younger people were more often targeted with these. I said I could feel an FOI coming on, and I could. This is what I got back from Northern Trains: There's quite a lot to unpack from this. Firstly, I'm surprised at just how...

www.railforums.co.uk

We do, of course, like to make sure that Train Companies follow their own procedures as well as the law and it is rather satisfying when we can assist in getting these sort of cases resolved.

Indeed and well expressed.

The only addition I would make is that collectively we can provide reassurance to those who are "anxious" fearing that their life is going to be very severely impacted. I would like think that whilst the matter is still a concern, our advice helps those who are anxious sleep more easily and get on with their lives.

 

[Somewhere]

And this has changed the risk/reward of habitual fare evasion adversely for fare dodgers.

As you say, in the past if you got away with 99 times before being caught, it could well be worth paying a fine on the 100th time. Now, with the digital trail that facilitates the fare dodging in the first place (eg buying a “short fare” online) you get landed with the cost for all the tickets you avoided.

Surely they'd have to catch you those other 99 times, unless you drop yourself in it by admitting it? They'd have to prove you didn't do all those other short trips

 

[skyhigh]

Surely they'd have to catch you those other 99 times, unless you drop yourself in it by admitting it? They'd have to prove you didn't do all those other short trips

The 'normal' method is to offer a settlement for their fees plus the 100 times they've calculated you've evaded the fare, otherwise they'll prosecute for the 1 time they have all the evidence they need.

 

[Somewhere]

The 'normal' method is to offer a settlement for their fees plus the 100 times they've calculated you've evaded the fare, otherwise they'll prosecute for the 1 time they have all the evidence they need.

That would be unfortunate if those other 99 fares were for the correct journey, and you accidentally did a short fare the one time you got caught out of habit!

 

[Brissle Girl]

That would be unfortunate if those other 99 fares were for the correct journey, and you accidentally did a short fare the one time you got caught out of habit!

And you’d need a really good explanation as to why you’ve bought 99 singles from (say) Finsbury Park to St Pancras when you live in Letchworth. It’s usually blindingly obvious fare evasion, when linked with the journey on the day caught.

 

[jfollows]

Anyone who works for a TOC and has responsibilities for prosecuting fare irregularities and prides themselves on doing a good job will want those prosecuted to have the best possible advice to be able to construct an appropriate and well-informed defence. The odds are loaded against people who fall foul of TOCs' rules, the behemoth of a professional prosecution department against an individual, and it's unrealistic to expect most of those accused to be able to pay for their own legal advice.
So this forum gives free, well-informed and self-correcting advice to people who ask for it, enabling them to construct an appropriate response in the face of what is quite intimidating.
This should be welcomed by all parties, especially the TOCs, and anyone who thinks the advice is a nuisance, or doesn't like being told that they've not done their jobs properly, is not doing a good job. Of course, that's not to say that some people will think this, there's definitely human nature involved if you're told that you're wrong, so for me the question is more about how many people are good at their jobs - and therefore welcome the advice given - and how many people like the heavy-handed intimidation approach.
It's certainly clear from cases reported here that some part of the TOCs is arrogant and intimidating, but I'd like to hope that more people involved are keener to see the right thing done than to tick a box and get a score. If people who work for TOCs are on incentives for the number of successful prosecutions they manage that would sound very bad to me.
But the bottom line is that they should welcome the advice given here, and I'd like to think that most of them do.

 

[6Gman]

Do you really think they wouldn't talk to each other to find out what they're doing without this forum?

I think the increasing level of smart ticketing and scanning data is probably the main reason for that.

I know a senior figure in one TOC (no names). They do indeed regularly meet to discuss such matters.

And, yes, people leaving audit trails of their behaviour/misbehaviour online gives TOCs opportunities that do not exist when people buy anonymous tickets using cash at a booking office.

And you’d need a really good explanation as to why you’ve bought 99 singles from (say) Finsbury Park to St Pancras when you live in Letchworth. It’s usually blindingly obvious fare evasion, when linked with the journey on the day caught.

Or Birmingham Moor Street to Dorridge + Wembley to Marylebone bought so close together that you couldn't possibly have done Dorridge-Wembley in some other way!

 

[Hadders]

Here's a good example of where this forum can help.

Caught Fare Dodging on 8/12/2023

Hi Everyone, I have been reading intently plenty of similar stories on this thread and want to share my experience to-date. Firstly, some background. I travel from Hitchin to Farringdon twice a week for work. I have a Network Railcard but do not, unfortunately, quality for a young-persons or...

www.railforums.co.uk

The OP in this thread was caught doughnutting, something we see frequently and I'm sure a common occurrance on the railway. I don't condone the actions of the OP, but who hasn't done something they later regret when they were younger. Clearly the issue needs resolving, the OP found the forum when doing their research and we have some good advice.

The OP followed our advice and engaged with GTR. Outcome was an out fo court settlement for £902 (£702 for fares avoided plus £200 admin fee). I'm sure the OP will feel this is a pretty hefty sum of money (you could almost call it a fine....). The railway gets all of the £902. The OP learns a lesson and moves on with their life.

On the other hand GTR could've prosecuted under the Bylaws for the single offence where the OP was caught. The OP would probably have been fined around £440, had to pay a surcharge of £176, costs (probably £200) and compensation for the fare avoided (about £30). Total payable around £846. Of this the railway would've got £230 with the rest going to the Treasury. In addition the case ends up having to go through the court system at a time when they're under pressure.

While I do have some concerns about how some train companies handle out of court settlements, and I do believe there should be more consistency in how they are handled, there are cases where it works well.

 

[bramling]

I have been wondering recently how the TOCs view the advice given on this Forum to people seeking help and advice on ticket irregularity issues. This has also been highlighted in #174 of this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ng-ticket-enforcer.260977/page-6#post-6587499 where the TOC actually points a poster to this Forum. Do they:

1. Say 'Oh no', not another letter in the format suggested by @Hadders.
2. Think that it is useful to have a source of independent advice which endorses the penalties issued by the TOCs.
3. Throw their hands up in horror when the Forum points out that the Penalty Fares notices are not legal.

Do the TOCs see this Forum as nuisance or a positive thing?

Can’t see it being seen as too much of an issue. Any reputable company, as we’d hope the TOCs are, would surely simply want to ensure correct processes are followed, which is generally what the advice here does.

If the advice was continually wrong and causing issues then obviously that would be another matter.

 

[MadMarsupial]

Might be more interesting to hear what the TOCs think of the social media "influencers" who encourage illegitimate ways of travelling "cheaply" on the railway.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Here's a good example of where this forum can help.

Caught Fare Dodging on 8/12/2023

Hi Everyone, I have been reading intently plenty of similar stories on this thread and want to share my experience to-date. Firstly, some background. I travel from Hitchin to Farringdon twice a week for work. I have a Network Railcard but do not, unfortunately, quality for a young-persons or...

www.railforums.co.uk

The OP in this thread was caught doughnutting, something we see frequently and I'm sure a common occurrance on the railway. I don't condone the actions of the OP, but who hasn't done something they later regret when they were younger. Clearly the issue needs resolving, the OP found the forum when doing their research and we have some good advice.

The OP followed our advice and engaged with GTR. Outcome was an out fo court settlement for £902 (£702 for fares avoided plus £200 admin fee). I'm sure the OP will feel this is a pretty hefty sum of money (you could almost call it a fine....). The railway gets all of the £902. The OP learns a lesson and moves on with their life.

On the other hand GTR could've prosecuted under the Bylaws for the single offence where the OP was caught. The OP would probably have been fined around £440, had to pay a surcharge of £176, costs (probably £200) and compensation for the fare avoided (about £30). Total payable around £846. Of this the railway would've got £230 with the rest going to the Treasury. In addition the case ends up having to go through the court system at a time when they're under pressure.

While I do have some concerns about how some train companies handle out of court settlements, and I do believe there should be more consistency in how they are handled, there are cases where it works well.

That is an excellent example of somebody who deserved assistance in getting the best resolution possible. They did something wrong, they got caught and immediately admitted to all the previous occasions they had done it.

Some of the others are a bit less clear cut. When somebody needs coaching on how sorry they should appear then it is debateable they are sorry at all. Although people are always told to remove personal details from anything they upload I can't imagine it would take a TOC long to work out the case involved and I do wonder what they think when people read drafts and tell the person involved to be more contrite.

 

[Haywain]

Might be more interesting to hear what the TOCs think of the social media "influencers" who encourage illegitimate ways of travelling "cheaply" on the railway.

They think as highly of them as we do.

Some of the others are a bit less clear cut. When somebody needs coaching on how sorry they should appear then it is debateable they are sorry at all. Although people are always told to remove personal details from anything they upload I can't imagine it would take a TOC long to work out the case involved and I do wonder what they think when people read drafts and tell the person involved to be more contrite.

People who come here looking for excuses and failing to indicate that they have any sense of having done wrong generally get short shrift here, and I think TOCs will, for the most part, see that our help is not unconditional.

However, if they do read the forum in the detail that is suggested it makes one wonder why Penalty Fare notices still don't carry the mandated wording.

 

[MrJeeves]

However, if they do read the forum in the detail that is suggested it makes one wonder why Penalty Fare notices still don't carry the mandated wording.

I wouldn't be surprised if the cost-benefit analysis was that it costs more to replace all the signage than it would to just accept the few appeals that come in on that basis.

 

[MotCO]

Given that SWR saw sense in this case and dropped it https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/unfair-fare-evasion-prosecution-letter.263581/#post-6669953 , do you think the TOCs 'use' the information we glean from OPs and gauge our support or otherwise to establish whether or not the OP has a genuine case or is just a chancer?

 

[Haywain]

Given that SWR saw sense in this case and dropped it https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/unfair-fare-evasion-prosecution-letter.263581/#post-6669953 , do you think the TOCs 'use' the information we glean from OPs and gauge our support or otherwise to establish whether or not the OP has a genuine case or is just a chancer?

No, I think that is highly unlikely, given that they have access to more information then we do.

 

[Deafdoggie]

No, I think that is highly unlikely, given that they have access to more information then we do.

Yeah, really the TOCs should share that so we can give even better advice...

 

[fandroid]

No, I think that is highly unlikely, given that they have access to more information then we do.

In that case it could simply have been that SWR checked the records of the Claygate TVM and found a fault. There would also have been a record of the ticket being collected. Customers with Advance tickets have almost no choice if they arrive at a station and find the TVM refusing to issue a ticket. Abandon the journey and the money already paid? All normal people would get on the train and seek help at the first opportunity, as the OP did. Hopefully, TOCs recognise the impossible position that cranky TVMs put Advance ticket purchasers in when e-Tickets are not an option for the journey in question.