Angry commuters start fightback against fines

[whole diary]

[Btline]

Angry commuters who had actually bought a ticket but then made a mistake are starting a fightback against TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) threatening them with prosecution.

Some horrendous examples from EC and XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise))! Thankfully, Chiltern Railways buck the trend and apply some common sense, endorsing a relieved passengers ticket (who had missed their train by minutes) for the next service. Who get the better PR^▸ (Public Relations)? What is the point of a turn up and go timetable?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/may/18/penalised-train-passengers-fight-ticketing-rules?

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^» (Great Central Railway - link to heritage line) 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."

[JayMac]

Many many thanks Btline for quoting an article in full. 

And for once I agree with you about Chiltern and how they dealt with this issue in one example.

That said though, common sense should apply equally to the passenger. You buy a ticket, you enter into a contract. Lack of knowledge of the contract terms is, in itself, not a reason to ignore them.

Caveat emptor.

[devon_metro]

Definition for commuter:
a passenger train that is ridden primarily by passengers who travel regularly from one place to another.


Angry commuters... I don't think so.

[Btline]

Many many thanks Btline...

And for once I agree with you...

 
 

Shame they can't change the rules so an advance fare means you have to travel within a 1-2 hour period or something.

So for Euston to manchester, you'd still have the flexibility of...say... 3 trains, but VT^▸ (Virgin Trains - former franchises) know you're travelling "at about 2pm".

[EBrown]

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

I see nothing wrong with that (other than fines are enforced by the court, do they mean penalty fares?). If you fail to meet the conditions of your ticket, you're fair game!

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

It's really hard to "accidentally" press the wrong one. Look at the spacing! Also, the email that you get sent is completely different and explains it.

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.

Must have missed those big signs that say you need a ticket at many stations. Season ticket holders have the ability to present their ticket at a later date. The railcard conditions clearly say you need to have your rail card with you.
Proof of purchase isn't a ticket.

"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.

Someone acting or purporting to act on behalf of the railways told this person to board. If it went to Court, XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) will lose (providing this person got themselves a solicitor or had some knowledge in the area).

"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,"

I disagree with the principle that a Platform Attendant can tell you to board a train, it should, in a case like this be down to the TM^‡(resolve)/Guard, it seems likely the Platform Attendant didn't have a good look at the tickets (when he would have noticed they were AP).

They do seem (on the face of it) very poor examples, but in the interests of a balanced story, I'd have to hear the other half of the story. The actual article is awful and full of errors.

To contrast to the misery in the article. Last year, I asked the Train Manager (and the person from Revenue Protection) on a XC train whether I could take the earlier train (on AP tickets) - They both said yes, the RPI^▸ (Revenue Protection Inspector (or Retail Price Index, depending on the context)) even took me to the Gateline at RDG^‡(resolve) to ensure I was let through!

I do think that there is a general lack of knowledge for the rules. Although that is standard for anything that involves a little reading; not many users of Google Drive probably noticed the T&Cs say they reserve the right to publish any of your work without further consent.

[ellendune]

The key question here is not whether the fine detail of the T&Cs.  It is whether a particular condition is fair.  If a court considers that such a condition is not fair it can set it aside.  I would be very interested to see what a court would make of some of these cases if they were tested.

I also recall an incident I witnessed last year on XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) where a passenger had forgotten her card and was merely asked to pay the excess to the full fare.   

[vacman]

This is a very dangerous game to play by PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) as the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s could just turn around and do away with AP tickets in order to simplify things! The coomon sense though should be applied afterwards, for example, you miss your booked train for whatever reason, the guard should issue a UFN^‡(resolve) but then the TOC's should use more common sense when chasing up the UFN. As it is now the guard can issue a UFN and when it is appealed against they very rarely uphold the appeal, this is the point where more discretion should be used.

[ellendune]

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. 
- giving more weight to the endorsement of a ticket in the event of a delay - I understand at present this is just a polite request to allow the passenger to travel.

[Southern Stag]

If a passenger is delayed whilst travelling on the rail network and as a result miss a connection on a an AP ticket they will be allowed to travel on the next service, regardless of whether they have split tickets or through tickets. If a ticket is endorsed by a ticket office I can't see any guard refusing to accept it.

[Btline]

This is a very dangerous game to play by PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) as the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s could just turn around and do away with AP tickets in order to simplify things!

They won't. If InterCity TOCs had their way, they would scrap walk on tickets so they can directly quota manage and have mandatory reservations. *cough... Virgin

TOCs also get 100% of the revenue from APs. So for XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)), their advances are basically the same price as an off peak return but they keep the money.

I'd be happier if Advances were axed and replaced with cheaper walk ons.

[vacman]

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. 

But that completely defeats the object as people would just buy an Advance with no real intention of catching their booked train, which in turn would make yield management impossible!

[ChrisB]

Upgrade only available within say, half an hour of booked train otherwise no one would bother buying any other ticket

[Milky Bar Kid]

Yet again people always blaming others but themselves. When you purchase said tickets you are asked to tick the box to accept T&C's so whats the arguement?! No you shouldnt just be able to excess your ticket as Vacman pointed out this just defeats the whole sunject. Im sure same rules apply to airline tickets do they not?

[Milky Bar Kid]

Also railcard holders have no ground to complain what so ever, read the T&C's again!! Also railcard holders get discounted further still on AP.

[Btline]

This isn't about whether people have read the rules or understand them. It's about whether the rules are appropriate.

I agree about the half hour advance refund policy. It allows yield management, but gives flexibility.