Mobile ticket. App OK, printout OK, but screenshot could lead to prosecution?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From The Guardian

Train companies are encouraging people to switch to e-tickets on the grounds that they are more convenient and better for the environment. But the case of a 72-year-old woman, who bought an e-ticket for her journey but was later threatened with prosecution in the magistrates court for alleged fare-dodging, may send some scurrying back to paper.

When you buy an e-ticket, it is emailed. On the train you show your smartphone – or a print-out of the ticket – to the inspector, who scans the barcode. But if a print-out is OK, then surely a screenshot is, too?

Pat Hendricks* [Not her real name] claims she was treated as if she was a criminal after she used a screenshot of her ticket’s barcode to gain access to the platform and board a train.

snip

Her file, the letter stated, was with the prosecutions team, “who are considering whether to issue a summons” at the magistrates court.

Hendricks pointed out she had bought a ticket, and sent evidence.

“I assumed that would be the end of it. But instead of an apology, demands became even more menacing.” A second letter alleged she had boarded a train “with the intention of travelling without having previously paid the correct amount”. Says Hendricks: “It was also suggested that a more serious charge of ‘intent to avoid a fare’ could be considered. It offered to end the matter if I paid £161.30.”

After much deliberation she decided to pay, as it would have cost more in legal fees to fight.

“It felt completely wrong, as though I had been treated like a criminal … I am lucky I could afford to pay it. For others on low incomes it could have been a financial disaster,” she says.

Amazing ... unless there's lots of evidence The Guardian has not shared,  Ms Hendricks very clearly HAD paid her fare and had no intent of travelling for free ... and that view appears to be shared by Transport Focus who have looked at this

Anthony Smith, who runs Transport Focus, which represents passengers, says the case suggests an “astonishing contempt for fare-paying passengers”, given there was clearly no intention to defraud the railway.

[Robin Summerhill]

I'm not sure that any other evidence is needed. Just think of this in another way:

Suppose that you get your e-ticket in a bona fide way having paid the appropriate fare. Taking a screenshot of the bar code is something that could be easily replicated. Leave the "poor 72-year-old woman" angle to one side for a moment  - what is to stop an unscrupulous blighter taking umpteen screen shots of a valid paid-for ticket and then flogging them down the pub?

I think we might need to temper our bile against the RPOs here.

[grahame]

I agree with your logic of selling them down the pub, Robin, but I really doubt that the lady in question intended to avoid paying her fare.   Surely there's a unique something in the code which identifies the particular ticket and would flag up if it had previously been used, and if there isn't then the rail industry should update its security ...

I think we might need to temper our bile against the RPOs here.

I'll let the article speak for itself.  My own "you cannot be serious" wasn't so much against the RPOs who have a difficult job but rather the follow up prosecution team, and I was informed in the view that this was not an attempt to avoid paying a fare by the comments on the case by Passenger Focus.

[Robin Summerhill]

I agree with your logic of selling them down the pub, Robin, but I really doubt that the lady in question intended to avoid paying her fare.   Surely there's a unique something in the code which identifies the particular ticket and would flag up if it had previously been used, and if there isn't then the rail industry should update its security ...

I agree that the circumstances in this case suggest (but only suggest and not prove) that the woman in question was not avoiding the fare or trying to avoid it, but to an extent that's not the point. The point is how does it look to an RPO on first impression?

Certainly additional checks could establish, for example, that it was paid for on her debit or credit card, but when the RPO first encounters the situation they aren't going to know that or have any means of checking. They will be aware, however, that this sort of thing could indicate potential fraud and, given the amount of people that do try it on with rail fares, they are not going to treat anybody with a potentially "suspect" ticket of being innocent until proven guilty. The system would never work if they did.

I also wonder why you consider that the railway's systems are at fault or lacking if they could not pick up an already-used ticket. As I understand it, the bar code contains the details of the journey paid for, including any restriction codes. I don't see how it could possibly also include data on whether that ticket had already been used, if for no other reason that a ticket will be checked more than once in a journey (ie. ingress and egress at the gatelines and also the possibility of multiple ticket checks en-route). It's not like a barcode on a tin of peas in Sainsbury's that could be programmed to not set off the shoplifter alarm once it has been scanned.

As an aside I have proved that card tickets are the same. I often travel Chippenham to Yate and break my journey at Temple Meads in both directions (fag breaks, you understand, or an adjournment to the cafe that used to be the taxi driver's rest room when I worked there). There have been occasions when I deliberately put the "wrong" ticket into the gateline eg the outbound portion that has already let me in and out once at TM^‡(resolve) on the outward journey, and lets me do it again on the return journey.

Personally, I am always concerned when a "sweet little 72-year-old lady" or similar is involved. I can give you many examples of pensioners of both sexes trying it on (like for example some in an old people's home in Corsham that I once discovered that were carrying buckets of hot water back from the communal laundry to their flat to avoid the costs of it going on their electric bill...)

There is often a tendency to equate "sweet little old lady" with innocence. I am casting no aspersions on this case, but always remember that Holloway was full of miscreant females 50 years ago, and some of 'em are now "sweet little 72-year-old ladies"

[Robin Summerhill]

I think we might need to temper our bile against the RPOs here.

I'll let the article speak for itself.  My own "you cannot be serious" wasn't so much against the RPOs who have a difficult job but rather the follow up prosecution team, and I was informed in the view that this was not an attempt to avoid paying a fare by the comments on the case by Passenger Focus.

You edited your post whilst I was typing so now I still can't stop for lunch 

I agree that the prosecution team probably cocked up here because, as I said earlier, there were various factors that could be checked like whose debit or credit card was it charged to. I hope they are not people with the same sort of mindset who administer the "appeals procedures" of parking companies...

[jamestheredengine]

Suppose that you get your e-ticket in a bona fide way having paid the appropriate fare. Taking a screenshot of the bar code is something that could be easily replicated. Leave the "poor 72-year-old woman" angle to one side for a moment  - what is to stop an unscrupulous blighter taking umpteen screen shots of a valid paid-for ticket and then flogging them down the pub?

But flogging photocopies down the pub is just fine in RPO-land...

[didcotdean]

This ticket is intended to be able to be printed off at home if you wish. I can't see what is less secure for revenue protection about a screenshot compared with a piece of paper though as both can be copied and distributed as many times as you want. Or indeed a copy of the pdf you are sent.

[Robin Summerhill]

This ticket is intended to be able to be printed off at home if you wish. I can't see what is less secure for revenue protection about a screenshot compared with a piece of paper though as both can be copied and distributed as many times as you want. Or indeed a copy of the pdf you are sent.

You are of course absolutely correct, so I and perhaps Graham as well need new lines of thought!

On the face of it, it looks like the new e-ticketing system is a security shambles. No matter how you get your ticket, a barcode can be copied, an pdf can be copied, and an email can be forwarded. Every single ticket issued in this way can be copied umpteen times and in umpteen different ways. Logically this means one of two things:

1. The e-ticket system is indeed a security shambles. Personally I would have thought this unlikely given the amount of people that should have been pouring over the technicalities, the practicalities, the gremlins and the pitfalls  before it was introduced. Of course, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) was probably deeply involved, so the chance of an e-ticket security shambles cannot be entirely ruled out...

or

2. There is some sort of security coding built into the barcode that we don't know about, and it wasn't present in the little old dear's screenshot, which is why it was picked up by the RPOs.

There may indeed be more to this story than has yet been revealed

[JayMac]

Let's not forget that 'classic' tickets can also be fraudulently produced.

[1st fan]

I've been asked at Paddington if I had considered e ticketing as an alternative to paper tickets. Not keen because technology has a habit of letting me down on things like this. I also said I sometimes didn't have that much time between finding out I was needing to travel and getting on the train. Therefore I might miss the train if trying to get the website to work and get a ticket on my phone at the station.

I was spoken to by a TM^‡(resolve) for having multiple return portions of tickets to MIM in my wallet. He asked why I had a few and didn't seem to have used them. I explained that whilst I was unable to use any other mode of transport to get to Moreton I often got a lift in a car back to London. He asked if I'd ever used any of these tickets twice or maybe bought them from someone and I said "No". If anything I had bought return tickets in 1st class when I would with hindsight have been better off buying singles.  I was able to prove this by producing the receipts and the debit card they were bought with.

[Clan Line]

I was spoken to by a TM^‡(resolve) for having multiple return portions of tickets to MIM in my wallet. He asked why I had a few and didn't seem to have used them................. He asked if I'd ever used any of these tickets twice or maybe bought them from someone and I said "No".

Did he also ask if the banknotes you also had in your wallet came from an ATM^‡(resolve) or some "sweet little 72 year old lady's handbag" ?

[1st fan]

No but then I don't think I had any money on me, I often don't when travelling. Interesting that he'd accept my ticket receipts and debit card as proof that I'd bought the ticket. Do you get a receipt with an e-ticket?

[martyjon]

Believe me, there is built in security for these 'new' forms of tickets. I'm not going to 'spill the beans' of the security detail as it would be akin to breaching The Official Secrets Act although maybe not with such harsh penalties, FULL STOP.

[grahame]

Ah ... I see Robin Summerhill has challenged me to update my view based on printouts being acceptable.  Sorry Robin, but I was aware of that in my original post - look at the subject line as I started the thread "Mobile ticket. App OK, printout OK, but screenshot could lead to prosecution?".     I was also very careful not to comment on the age of the person involved - not to caricature her as a "little old lady" with any presumptions implied.

I'm sure there are ways and means of detecting the apparent loophole of accepting multiple printouts from the same tickets, and I can guess what they might be (and how they could go wrong on a complex journey, especially one planned on trains that end up failing to run to schedule).  Having seen the Passenger Focus comment and knowing they looked at the case, I have little doubt that the journey had been paid for and the follow up after the day was incorrect and out of order.

[eXPassenger]

Believe me, there is built in security for these 'new' forms of tickets. I'm not going to 'spill the beans' of the security detail as it would be akin to breaching The Official Secrets Act although maybe not with such harsh penalties, FULL STOP.

I can see security options for tickets on the app, but if there is an open ticket that has been printed the only option I can see is a radio check to a central server when on the train, or a similar check by the gateline.

Similarly I use print at home tickets for London art exhibitions.  These are normally checked visually on arrival.  Sometimes they are scribbled on to stop the same piece of paper being used twice.