Great Western Coffee Shop

Rail passengers threatened with fines and even prosecution by train guards ^ despite buying a ticket ^ have called on the rail passenger watchdog to challenge their legality amid growing consumer anger.

Guardian Money has been contacted by rail passengers who boarded the "wrong" train on the advice of platform staff, only for the guard to insist that, rather than upgrading their fare, they must buy a new ticket costing in some cases hundreds of pounds.

Next week consumer watchdog Passenger Focus will publish a report calling for a change in the way train companies treat passengers, following a spate of incidents reported in Guardian Money. Passenger Focus will argue that the way passengers buy tickets has changed dramatically in recent years and the rules need to be updated. It is also expected to say train staff have to start taking a more common-sense approach to people who have bought tickets and have simply made a mistake. So far it has ruled out a legal challenge.

Currently if you have an advance ticket to, say, Newcastle and are booked on a certain train, the ticket is only valid for that service. If, say, your baby was sick all over you as you were due to leave, forcing you to get a later train, the guard can make you buy a new ticket ^ even if the train is empty.

In other cases, passengers on the right train but who were unable to show a ticket or a railcard left at home ^ but have proof of purchase ^ complained they were treated as though they were fare evaders, and in some cases threatened with prosecution.

Regular train users have questioned the legality of these "penalties" and asked whether their validity should be challenged in the courts.

Guardian Money was recently contacted by GC from London. Wanting to travel from Gloucester to Manchester last December, he'd bought a ticket using thetrainline.com. When he arrived at the station he found he had mistakenly clicked the "print at home" box and couldn't pick up the tickets. A call to thetrainline was useless, but as he had a copy of the ticket (as a PDF) on his iPhone, ticket staff advised him to talk to the ticket inspector when the Cross Country train arrived.

"The ticket inspector told me to simply get on the train and he would sort it on board. I said I didn't want to travel if this would get me in trouble and would rather buy a new ticket but he insisted it would be fine," he says.

The guard issued him a new ticket and said he had to write a report as a matter of course but it was unlikely anything would happen. But in February he received a letter from Transport Investigations (which acts on Cross Country's behalf) accusing him of travelling without a valid ticket and threatening prosecution.

"I wrote back explaining what happened, and sent a copy of my ticket and booking reference emails etc. The company replied suggesting it was the passenger's responsibility to pay the fare due and show a valid ticket when asked. A few weeks later it sent me a court summons to appear at Gloucester magistrates court."

Ironically, had he bought the ticket from Cross Country Train's website he could have elected to have had it sent directly to his phone. Money intervened on his behalf, and the case was dropped his week, but he says the matter was hugely stressful and time consuming. "I could understand it if I hadn't bought a ticket, but I had ^ and could show I had," he said.

Lucy Horitz, who works for the Cricket Foundation in London, wrote about two contrasting experiences. She and a colleague recently travelled on East Coast Trains from Newark to London. They bought advance singles for the lunchtime train for ^29.50 and ^19.45 with a young person's railcard.

"At Newark station, we found ourselves 20 minutes early and discovered that there was another East Coast train departing at 11.54am. The guard on the station said that it would be fine for us to get on this train," she says.

On board, however, another guard took a different view and insisted the pair buy two anytime single tickets at ^74.50 each. She refused to let them pay the difference of an off-peak day single (^46.40) and wouldn't take into account the railcard, or that they had been advised it would be OK at the station.

"We are not cheats ^ we are regular ticket-buyers who had been ill-advised. The train we got on was 80% empty, so we weren't taking a seat from another paying customer. Throughout, the behaviour of the guard was appalling. In the course of discussions with us she became rude and raised her voice unnecessarily, leaning over my colleague threateningly. I think she was just using it as an excuse to get a commission on the new fare," she says.

Horitz, however, recorded a much happier experience using Chiltern Railways. She missed a pre-booked train to Birmingham by two minutes. She was delighted when a staff member stamped her tickets and allowed her to catch the following train ^ proof she says it can be done.

Then there was KC of London. She arrived at King's Cross to take an East Coast train to Dundee. The ticket printing machine wasn't working. Platform staff advised her to board the train, but the guard gave her an unpaid fares notice of ^162.50. When she appealed, East Coast apologised but incredibly refused a refund, until Money intervened.

Following that case we were contacted by other readers questioning the legality of the train company's stance. They point to banks, which for years argued that overdraft and late payment penalties were sacrosanct, but which were then legally challenged. Train penalties could and should face the same scrutiny, they argued.

Anthony Smith, Passenger Focus's chief executive, says his report next Tuesday will back up these cases with others, and call for a change in the rules governing ticketing ^ some of which stem as far back as 1889.

"Too many passengers who bought tickets but made an innocent mistake are being treated as though they had no intention to buy a ticket. We believe this is wrong and we will be pressing the train companies to take a more common-sense approach. The way people buy and use tickets has changed radically and rules governing their use are badly in need of an overhaul."

He said he opposed a legal challenge but didn't rule out an appeal to the rail regulator adding: "This is a battle we will win."

A spokeswoman for the Association of Train Operating Companies said: "Train companies do their best to take a firm but fair approach to fare dodging. However, we understand that people make innocent mistakes and we are reviewing our approach so that, wherever possible, passengers aren't unfairly penalised."

Many many thanks Btline...

And for once I agree with you...

Rail passengers threatened with fines and even prosecution by train guards - despite buying a ticket

he'd bought a ticket using thetrainline.com. When he arrived at the station he found he had mistakenly clicked the "print at home" box and couldn't pick up the tickets

unable to show a ticket or a railcard left at home ^ but have proof of purchase ^ complained they were treated as though they were fare evaders, and in some cases threatened with prosecution.

"The ticket inspector told me to simply get on the train and he would sort it on board. I said I didn't want to travel if this would get me in trouble and would rather buy a new ticket but he insisted it would be fine," he says.

The guard issued him a new ticket and said he had to write a report as a matter of course but it was unlikely anything would happen. But in February he received a letter from Transport Investigations (which acts on Cross Country's behalf) accusing him of travelling without a valid ticket and threatening prosecution.

"At Newark station, we found ourselves 20 minutes early and discovered that there was another East Coast train departing at 11.54am. The guard on the station said that it would be fine for us to get on this train,"

This is a very dangerous game to play by PF as the TOC's could just turn around and do away with AP tickets in order to simplify things!

The simplest thing would be to get some T&C that everyone accepted were fair! Like for example:

- the ability to upgrade an invalid ticket by paying only the excess. 

It is about reading the T&C's!!

Same applies on airlines.  You book a CHEAP ticket for a certain plane at a certain time.  If you miss it, tough.  If you pay more (not on ALL airlines, granted) you are given flexibility with your ticket.  We need tighter control BEFORE people get on trains to avoid situations such as outlined above.  Unfortunately that is near on impossible. 

If you miss the train to Manchester, why can't you just get the next one 20 minutes later? Why do the railways penalise such people when they've already bought a ticket and it won't cost the railways a penny to carry them on the next service?

Because if people were just allowed to catch any service with an AP ticket why would anybody ever buy a walk up ticket? Just buy any AP for any train, you'll be allowed to travel whenever you want. The railway would lose so much revenue. Allowing people who get on the wrong train with AP off is unfair on those people who use AP properly, and catch the right train even if it's not convenient to them and those who pay the price for flexibility by buying a walk up ticket.

Yes, we should leave enough time... blah blah. Sometimes it doesn't happen whether it's your fault, the traffic, or whether it's been a bad day. It's called life.

It is all very well saying "rules are rules", "read the T&Cs" etc etc, but that just makes rail travel look like a terribly restrictive,

Restrictive ticket (AP): Very Cheap
Less Restrictive ticket (Off-Peak): Cheap
Virtually no restriction ticket (Anytime): Expensive

Or have a ^5 surcharge to validate it on any train for 3 hours.

An attitude that all passenegers are on the fiddle and we must therefore penalise them at every opportunity is the complete antithesis of customer care.  Thankfully there are many railway staff who seem to be able to be polite and helpful while enforceing the system.  The abolition of this ridiculous rule would help them and would bring much more public support for the rail industry.

That could work, but, lets say you are taking a Virgin Train (and travelling First Class), you are booked on a service that doesn't serve dinner, but wish to change to one that does. Is ^5 fair to the TOC?

I agree that rules are rules.

No one raises major complaints if they miss a flight with a non-flexible ticket, so why should train travel be any different.....

mobile phone runs out of battery, simple you have to buy a new ticket! its in the nrcoc that you will be treated as travelling without a ticket! see it quite often then they start moaning etc.

I believe you can upgrade before you travel - just at the ticket office, not on the train. Ollie?

The idea of being lubby dubby and believing every sob story is just unworkable, people will say anything to avoid a fare and to say that people on the wrong trains are treated the same as fare dodgers is just untrue and can only come from someone who is either from another planet and no concept of what really happens on the railway, wrong ticket=new ticket, no ticket/money=day in court and fine up to ^1000. and you all seem to have missed the point that discretion is used a hell of a lot now WHEN people bother to go and sort it out before getting on the train, its only the ones who just get on the train and think that the rules dont apply to them that usually get stung.

Changes, but not refunds (except in the case of delays to your booked service) are available up to the departure of your first reserved train subject to a payment of a ^10 administration fee and the difference between the ticket held and the cheapest ticket available for the journey, walk-up or advance, no refund will be paid if the new ticket is cheaper though. A ^10 admin fee isn't charged if you want to upgrade to First Class but stay on the original booked service and ticket office staff have been known to waive it in some other cases using their discretion, but I'm not sure if that's policy or not. The Advance ticket FAQ's available to staff goes on about maximum flexibility to change Advance tickets before departure of the original service and no flexibility afterwards.

The railway could try publicising what to do if you have an AP ticket and miss your train. 

WATCHDOG REVEALS INNOCENT PASSENGERS CAUGHT IN TICKET CRACKDOWN

22.05.2012

Passengers using Britain^s rail network face very inconsistent treatment when travelling without a ^valid^ ticket a new report from Passenger Focus reveals today. Passengers who make an innocent mistake can find themselves facing a hefty bill, or in some of the worst cases, a criminal prosecution.

Passenger Focus has been contacted by hundreds of passengers who have faced very unfair treatment as a result of an inconsistent application of complex rules. In some cases individual staff deal with situations well, but sometimes the consequences can be severe with payment of large ^fines^ and threats of criminal prosecution.

Anthony Smith, Passenger Focus, chief executive said: ^No one is in favour of fare dodgers. However, passengers deserve a fair hearing. If they have forgotten their railcard, lost one of their tickets but have proof of purchase or have been unable to pick up booked tickets they should be given a second chance. Passengers, when boarding a train, are entering a minefield of rules and regulations, some dating back to Victorian times.^

Mr Smith continued, ^any form of privatised justice like this must be administered according to clear guidelines, be accountable, give passengers a fair hearing and not assume everyone is guilty. Train companies cannot continue to treat some of their customers like this ^one strike and you are out^ is simply not fair.^

Rail Minister Norman Baker, said: ^Passengers have a right for the rules to be consistently applied across all operators.  It is worrying if Passenger Focus has found that this is not case. It is in the interests of Train Operating Companies that passengers are confident in what they are buying.^

Passenger Focus wants to see:

- the introduction of a code of practice for non Penalty Fare areas which sets out clear and consistent guidelines on how passengers who board without a ^valid^ ticket should be dealt with. This should include clear rules on how to deal with passengers with disabilities, cases where a passenger has a ticket but has missed a booked train and a formal right of appeal

- passengers should only face criminal prosecution with proof of intent to defraud

- greater flexibility when a passenger can prove they bought a valid ticket but cannot produce the ticket (or all of them) when asked

- greater transparency on how many penalties are issued, for what and how many appeals are upheld or overturned.

The Association of Train Operating Companies has already undertaken to co-ordinate the drawing up of national guidelines to ensure more consistent treatment of passengers ^ this move is very welcome. In order to make those guidelines as effective as possible Passenger Focus is asking passengers to tell their stories, good and bad, about how they were dealt with when found without a ^valid^ ticket. Passengers can do this on a Facebook page:

Notes to editors

Please see our facebook page http://www.facebook.com/PassengerFocus, launched today where we are asking passengers to tell us their experiences ^ we will use these to build upon the dossier of evidence being created to drive change and stop this happening to any more passengers.

Generally I agree with the "rules are rules" argument.If you don't want to be tied down to a particular train, don't book an advance ticket.

I do think that if someone has an advance ticket and travels on another train, they should only pay the extra (large as it will be) and not have their original ticket disregarded.

The "the man on the platform said it would be Ok" routine dates back to the earliest days of railways (in my case, the early 80s!). 

By the way, I was not impressed with VT charging £78.50 Std Single Euston -Manchester on every train from 16 00 to 19 40 last Wednesday.  In our supposedly "free market" railway, VT are not allowed to be competed against on the direct route (and have in any case filled up the railway).

I went for a drink with some friends and got the 20 00 - £49 1st, £32.50 Std, Advance, of course.

On Saturday, I got a £47.50 Std advance single back to Plymouth on the 18 04 ex Liverpool - a very good deal.  It's worth sticking to the rules, in my book.

I believe the 'publicising' is already out there in the T&Cs. If you miss your train (and the fault doesn't lie with the railway) then you have to buy a new ticket. That seems very straightforward to me.

Much talk of having some flexibility with Advance Purchase tickets to allow travel on a later service, but that rather negates the whole point of having a 'booked train only' ticket.

Yes, the rail industry could introduce some flexibility, but that would come at some cost. You can't have Joe Bloggs buying a ^10 AP for the 1500 service and hoping it will be valid on the 1530 or 1600 service. The whole point of cheap APs is to use yield management and fill up seats on a particular service.

e.g. (at a particular date when the ticket purchase is made):

1500 ^10 Advance
1530 ^20 Advance
1600 ^30 Advance

Flexible walk-up ticket valid on any of those three trains, for example costs ^50. How should the TOC price things so as to allow Advance Purchase valid on all three of those trains? They'd have to introduce a sort of Advance Plus to allow for the spread. Do we really need another tier of tickets that will add further confusion? If such a spread were introduced it would make yield management that more difficult and no doubt push up the price for those who are quite able to understand the T&Cs and arrive in time to catch their one booked train...

No. Keep Advance Purchase as they are. Miss your booked train and it's not the rail industry's fault, buy a new ticket. If you know you can't make your booked train and have time, then trade-up and pay the admin fee. If you don't have time and the fault isn't with the rail industry then hard lines.

Flexible AP tickets will not work. Yes the rules etc could and should be simplified but the system itself works, i wonder what percentage of people do NOT incur problems with AP tickets to those that do??

That is what i am trying to say, you hear all the bad stories etc but very rarely the good. I would like to see how many people actually find the sysyem works as it. I also fail to see how if you started upgrading tickets because of missed trains etc would make things easier? The system would then be flawed and again people would come to expect such actions everytime, the way the system works should be made much clearer at point of purchase that is where i believe the system needs improving but as i have said i personally think it works.

if someone does get on the train with for example a reference number then they should be issued with a UFN (as now) BUT they should have this quashed when they appeal showing proof of purchase etc and maybe allow everyone 2 chances per year, as is the case with people who leave their season tickets at home now!

The excess idea could work, if you miss your booked train they could allow the excess pluss ^10 admin fee (as is allowed if done BEFORE your booked train i.e. travelling too early) but these excess should only be available if done before boarding the train, if you just get on and hope for the best then you should be charged a whole new ticket as you would now, if this were the case then there would be an incentive for people to actually go and sort their ticket out before boarding rather than just getting on and hoping for the best.

But my point still stands about the UFN process not working very well, if someone does get on the train with for example a reference number then they should be issued with a UFN (as now) BUT they should have this quashed when they appeal showing proof of purchase etc and maybe allow everyone 2 chances per year, as is the case with people who leave their season tickets at home now!

But why should you be? Why in principle should people not be able to do it on the train? Yes it is administratively more costly, so the answer to that is you charge more for ticket sales on the train. Make the admin charge higher. Again, this is about changing the mindset, the message should be about charging more for using premium services, not imposing penalties for transgressing arbitrary rules.

People shouldn't be allowed to buy on trains because in general tickets should be bought before travelling. If you could upgrade on the train there is the chance that you'll be able to get away without paying, there would be no incentive to upgrade before you board the train so everybody would try and upgrade on the train, if for whatever reason tickets aren't checked then no excess is paid. If there is an incentive to upgrade before you board the train, because you won't have to buy a whole new ticket then you would decrease the number of people chancing it and increase the number of people paying the correct price.

 

As I've already said, the easy way to give people an incentive to upgrade at the station is to make it more expensive to do so on the train, but that's not the same as making it a penalty. If you treat people better, i.e. as customers rather than presumed cheats, the railways would have a  better reputation and that would increase the number of people paying to use it.

the ones who usually shout loudest are the ones who are caught out playing the system and i reckon about 70% of people who i "Catch" on Advance tickets on the wrong trains are regular travellers who know the score and play the system

How would it make things easier? Well, pretty obviously, if you make things easier for the customer to buy the service they want you get fewer complaints and less incentive for evasion. It takes away the confrontation and, crucuially,  the language of confrontation. 

Be honest: which situation would you prefer to deal with?

A:
"Excuse me, I have a ticket for a different train, please can I buy an upgrade so I can go on this one instead?"
"Certainly sir, that will ^x, plus an admin fee of ^y" (The rules having been clearly and repeatedly explained beforehand, and ^y being reasonable)

Or B:
"I'm afraid that ticket isn't valid on this train. So I'm going to have to charge you full fare single ...well it did say on the website and on the posters... rules are rules"... National Conditions of Carriage Part 7, paragraph B etc etc"...

The excess idea could work, if you miss your booked train they could allow the excess pluss ^10 admin fee (as is allowed if done BEFORE your booked train i.e. travelling too early) but these excess should only be available if done before boarding the train, if you just get on and hope for the best then you should be charged a whole new ticket as you would now, if this were the case then there would be an incentive for people to actually go and sort their ticket out before boarding rather than just getting on and hoping for the best.
But my point still stands about the UFN process not working very well, if someone does get on the train with for example a reference number then they should be issued with a UFN (as now) BUT they should have this quashed when they appeal showing proof of purchase etc and maybe allow everyone 2 chances per year, as is the case with people who leave their season tickets at home now!

This is an example of what I was referring to earlier- starting off with what makes things easier for the operator and then working out how to get passengers to comply with it. That isn't customer service, it is the industry making things more difficult for passengers as an alternative to providing sufficient staff to do on-board ticket checks properly. 

As I've already said, the easy way to give people an incentive to upgrade at the station is to make it more expensive to do so on the train, but that's not the same as making it a penalty. If you treat people better, i.e. as customers rather than presumed cheats, the railways would have a  better reputation and that would increase the number of people paying to use it.

Whilst we keep going back to the T&C's it is worth pointing out that the T&C's for Advance tickets are actually very simple and take up just one or two paragraphs so it isn't like when you sign a mobile phone contract with pages and pages of drivel, yes there does need to be a little more discretion built into the system and the best way that can be achieved is by having a system where any problems must be sorted out before travelling, the only exception to this would be from unmanned stations (as now) to just allow everyone to get on train and pay what they would at the station just wouldn't work, it takes me from Pad to Westbury to get through a train now, and thats good going, if I had to stop and excess every other ticket then most of the train would go free or on the wrong train, everyone would soon latch on to that idea and do the same, even when you have an assist it is difficult to get the train up tight so it just doesn't work!

Most stations attach a T&C summary card to the ticket when they sell it, this should be compulsory I think or have it printed on the reverse, it wouldnt be impossible to have different ticket stock for Advance tickets but it could cause some probles in ticket offices, only real way would be to have 2 printers for each star machine one for Advance and one for walk up but the cost could be prohibative no doubt.

There clearly are suggestions that could help make things easier with AP tickets but suggesting that the T&C's be displayed wouldnt work as people struggle to read timetables and CIS and resort to double checking with station staff to reassure themselves hence why I always say if in doubt ASK someone, thats what they are there for.

I know of many staff who work in ticket offices who supply the AP booklet with tickets and also verbally warn passengers 'you must only travel on the train you have just purchased tickets for' I think the problem arises when people buy AP tickets online see a price and think thats cheap, the problem then occurs whe they have purchased without fully looking and reading the infomation that is clearly visable (national rail website quite clearly highlights BOOKED TRAIN ONLY, NO REFUNDS) miss their train only to find out they didnt read the T&C's or that no one had explained it to them thus proving that people are never willing to own up to their mistakes and take responsibility for their actions.

I see that XC have now scrapped XC ONLY walk up fares and if this arguement continues then TOC's will remove said AP tickets, Its also worth noting that i know of people who buy advance tickets and find the system works well and also the saving is considerable more than what it would be if purchasing a season ticket, The way foward as i pointed out earlier in the thread could be to limit AP tickets, groupsave etc due to rising demand with the option of discounted tickets only throught the use of railcards.

I see that XC have now scrapped XC ONLY walk up fares...

How difficult would it be to modify the tickets so they say on the back

*Booked train only. No refunds.

Apparently, XC have also shamelessly axed XC only fares in the South West meaning that locals will have to shell out the full whack.

no one is jumping to the wrong conclusion it is fact!!

Pretty much all of them have been axed. Only Glasgow to Edinburgh seems to have survived the latest XC fares bloodbath. And that fare, once a very reasonable ^2 (?) has been jacked up to ^7.50 over the years.

Now that the XC only walk up fares have been removed there will no doubt be less people who accidently on purpouse buy the XC only tickets from the TVM and get on FGW services, who incidently could be and have been Penalty Fared for this.

Worked the same service EXD-BRI 3 days in one week... 1st day, lady "accidently" boarded with a XC Only fare... was excessed to correct fare (I should have charged new ticket, but used my discretion  :P).  2nd day, I had a ticket assist who saw said lady, same excuse, was excessed again (I didn't realise it was her until the assist TM mentioned it after).  I went through the train and warned her I was aware what she was doing and if full fare would be charged in future.  A couple of days later... same ticket, same woman... full fare new ticket was sold, and received a huge amount of verbal abuse from her for being a "jobsworth".   ::)

A good example of why TOCs do end some types of TOC specific tickets when blatant abuse like this goes on which is a shame as it spoils it for those who did use the ticket on the right trains.

In my opinion the whole of these problems arise for both staff and passengers from the overtly complex fares system.

TOCs trying to be airlines with their pricing, having their own fares between places so they get all the revenue, (it only makes work for the "bean counters" allocating the money), numerous restrictions on trains you can travel on with certain tickets etc. etc.

The whole fares manual conditions of carrige need to be scrapped.

Start again with a fresh sheet of paper.

The mainfare should be a ticket to travel on any train between any two points by any permitted route (farily freely interpreted and the fare should be the fare. No cheaper splits etc. break of journey permitted both directions.

The TOCs should then be compelled to sell Advanced tickets with a leyway of one train either side for most trains. You lose your reservation if you travel on wrong train.

KISS!

 Keep It Simple Stupid.