(Rant) ID Required to prove I own a Disabled Railcard

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

Chris - for clarity, my comment referred to the anecdote about the Basingstoke incident.

Erm ... sorry, John, but you've rather lost me there: I was replying to thetrout's post, regarding the problem he had with a member of the barrier staff at BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI))? 

[moonrakerz]

My daughter recently traveled to Kent and back using the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) service from BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Waterloo. On the up journey the ticket inspector came round again after the train left Basingstoke, he saw my daughter and said "didn't you have a ticket to Basingstoke". My daughter then produced a second ticket from Basingstoke to Kent, the inspector then informed her that it would have been cheaper to buy a though ticket - which it wasn't, hence her having two tickets !
Exactly the same thing happened on the return journey, different inspector. Another passenger ("customer" just doesn't sound right !) sitting opposite remarked that he often had the same problem on that service.

To my mind, that is a very sharp inspector who is looking to spot people going further than their ticket allows. And nobody should have a complaint in that situation, if they are questioned. It happens to me very ocassionally as I have a split season ticket. So I would give him 10/10 for asking her to show her ticket beyond Basingstoke, though maybe deduct a mark or two if the following advice was dodgy.

Neither I nor my daughter had any complaint about the inspector spotting that she was on the train beyond the ticket she had shown him, he was spot on, on the ball, doing exactly what he was paid to do. It was disappointing that the "advice" he offered, was however, incorrect. From my daughter's experience, and the other passenger's this was not a "one off". 

[Btline]

Why don't they just give a photocard with each railcard.

Another problem solved....

[paul7575]

My daughter recently traveled to Kent and back using the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) service from BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Waterloo. On the up journey the ticket inspector came round again after the train left Basingstoke, he saw my daughter and said "didn't you have a ticket to Basingstoke". My daughter then produced a second ticket from Basingstoke to Kent, the inspector then informed her that it would have been cheaper to buy a though ticket - which it wasn't, hence her having two tickets !
Exactly the same thing happened on the return journey, different inspector. Another passenger ("customer" just doesn't sound right !) sitting opposite remarked that he often had the same problem on that service.

To my mind, that is a very sharp inspector who is looking to spot people going further than their ticket allows. And nobody should have a complaint in that situation, if they are questioned. It happens to me very ocassionally as I have a split season ticket. So I would give him 10/10 for asking her to show her ticket beyond Basingstoke, though maybe deduct a mark or two if the following advice was dodgy.

If travelling on legitimately split tickets and remaining on the one train, why not just show both together when the gripper comes around?

Paul

[Chris from Nailsea]

Because the second ticket isn't valid during the first part of the journey? 

[thetrout]

Thanks again for your comments.

I've decided not to complain unless it becomes a regular event, if it does happen again then I may just get a photocard!

[Mookiemoo]

Why don't they just give a photocard with each railcard.

Another problem solved....

Because it is discriminatory to ask a disabled person to prove they are disabled

<begin personal rant>

Its the reason you can get a chip and signature card (rather than chip and pin) by stating you are disabled and cannot use a pin machine - they cannot ask you to prove it.  Hence all my cars except my ATM^‡(resolve) card are chip and Sig.  As long as its chip and sig if there is fraud, it is the responsibility of the card company and retailer to prove it was not me - if its chip and pin, then  I have to prove any fraud wasnt me - only way to do it is to be out of the country or have a simultaneous transaction the other end of the country.  That was the motive for bringing chip and pin in, not for consumer protection. 

So I'm dyslexic and will always block my pin cards by hitting the wrong numbers!

Then you get the other consumer argument - the retailers who say they only accept pin - no signature - if you have a chip and sig and they refuse to accept it, I sick Visa/Amex/whoever on them.  Its against the T&C of their agreement not to accept a chip card that requests a signature - they can refuse a card with no chip at all.  Four local retailers have caved and I'm currently siccing Visa on Wing Yip. 

<end personal rant>

[Ollie]

I'm not aware of any requirement to show photo id with the Disabled Railcard, the only thing I can think of is if they were doing checks to ensure name on railcard is the actual holder.

[vacman]

From what you wrote thetrout it appears that the member of staff was polite ("do you have any ID sir"), I will look into the T's & C's of the disabled railcard, I know with a family railcard one of the conditions is that you may be asked for ID to confirm you are one of the card holders, I don't think the issue is that your disabilty was doubted but that you were the actual railcard holder as railcards do get stolen, lent to friends etc.. on a positive note if your railcard HAD been stolen and the theif was caught out in this way and you were re-united with your card then you'd be pretty impressed! You don't have to prove to the member of staff that you are disabled just that you are the person named on the card, if the member of staff wasn't rude then I wouldn't take it to personally.

[moonrakerz]

  Hence all my cars except my ATM^‡(resolve) card are chip and Sig.  As long as its chip and sig if there is fraud, it is the responsibility of the card company and retailer to prove it was not me - if its chip and pin, then  I have to prove any fraud wasnt me - only way to do it is to be out of the country or have a simultaneous transaction the other end of the country.  That was the motive for bringing chip and pin in, not for consumer protection. 

I'm afraid you are getting a bit confused on the chip and PIN thing.
As far as customer liability goes there is no change, the main change was that more liability for fraud ended up with the merchant not the bank. If there was fraud on your card, the bank still has to prove that you were negligent or responsible - mind you that doesn't seem to stop them trying it on anyway !

"Does chip and PIN change my liability for any fraud committed on my card?

There is no change in liability for the cardholder. Consumers remain fully protected from the cost of card fraud, provided they have not been negligent, as they are fully covered by the Banking Code."

Chip & Pin website.

Just get a bit away from the subject of this thread, but may be useful.
ONLY use your debit card where you are completely sure of it's security. ATM's, Supermarkets for cash back, and Govt websites that only accept debit cards. EVERYWHERE else, use a credit card.
Reason: If fraud occurs on your debit card, it is YOUR money that they have used. You should get it back eventually, but in the meantime how do you pay the mortgage, buy food, etc, etc.
If fraud occurs on your credit card, it IS NOT your money;  just tell the card company that you didn't authorise the transaction and don't pay the bill ! Plus, you get full protection of Sect 75 of the Consumer Credit Act - which can be very useful.
End of lecture ! 

[paul7575]

Because the second ticket isn't valid during the first part of the journey? 

Sure - but the gripper won't actually mark it, he'll just know your intention already when you don't get off at the changeover station...

I do it fairly regularly Fareham - Basingstoke - Waterloo on SWT^▸ (South West Trains).

Paul

[Nibat]

My first post this one, don't want to be unpopular but I have to say this member of staff was doing his job properly.  Here we go:

As stated in the Terms & Conditions of the Railcard:

8. The Railcard and all tickets issued at a Railcard discount are issued subject to the National Rail Conditions of Carriage and the Conditions listed in this leaflet. Copies of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage are available from any staffed station ticket office or online at www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/nrcc/.

If you go to the National Rail Condition of Carriage, Section 1 Part D:

22. Inspection of tickets
You must show and, if asked to do so by the staff of a Train Company or its agent, hand over for inspection a valid ticket and any relevant Railcard, photocard or other form of personal identification in accordance with Condition 15. If you do not, you will be treated as having joined a train without a ticket and the relevant parts of Condition 2 or 4 will apply. If an Electronic Ticket cannot be displayed, you will be treated as if you were unable to hand over for inspection a valid ticket.

And as above, same place, Section 1 Part B:

15. Photocards
Some types of tickets (including many Season Tickets, tickets bought with a Railcard and Electronic Tickets) are only valid with either:
(a) a photocard showing a photograph which is a true likeness of the person for whom the ticket was issued; or
(b) another form of personal identification.

I can't speak for this person (it wasn't me  ) but I guess either he was brief to do that for some reason of he thought something was suspicious (I don't know you, so obviously I can't tell).

Again, I don't want to be unfriendly or anything like that, it's only that is a bit annoying to have to read things like that when somebody is doing the job is suppose to do.  And anyway the whole discussion seems a bit pointless to me...   

[Chris from Nailsea]

Well, thank you very much for such a detailed, informative and indeed authoritative first post, Nibat! 

While still smarting slightly, in view of my earlier opinion on this situation being comprehensively demolished, I'd like to offer you a very warm welcome to the Coffee Shop forum!

Chris 

[moonrakerz]

As stated in the Terms & Conditions of the Railcard:

If you go to the National Rail Condition of Carriage, Section 1 Part D:

And as above, same place, Section 1 Part B:
 

A few people might peruse the Ts & Cs of the railcard if they were really keen - but are we really meant to read National Rail Conditions of Carriage ??

I'm going up to Waterloo next week on my "old git's railcard" - better get reading in case I should be carrying a certified copy of my DNA profile or my granny's birth certificate !   

[Mookiemoo]

  Hence all my cars except my ATM^‡(resolve) card are chip and Sig.  As long as its chip and sig if there is fraud, it is the responsibility of the card company and retailer to prove it was not me - if its chip and pin, then  I have to prove any fraud wasnt me - only way to do it is to be out of the country or have a simultaneous transaction the other end of the country.  That was the motive for bringing chip and pin in, not for consumer protection. 

I'm afraid you are getting a bit confused on the chip and PIN thing.
As far as customer liability goes there is no change, the main change was that more liability for fraud ended up with the merchant not the bank. If there was fraud on your card, the bank still has to prove that you were negligent or responsible - mind you that doesn't seem to stop them trying it on anyway !

"Does chip and PIN change my liability for any fraud committed on my card?

There is no change in liability for the cardholder. Consumers remain fully protected from the cost of card fraud, provided they have not been negligent, as they are fully covered by the Banking Code."

Chip & Pin website.

Just get a bit away from the subject of this thread, but may be useful.
ONLY use your debit card where you are completely sure of it's security. ATM's, Supermarkets for cash back, and Govt websites that only accept debit cards. EVERYWHERE else, use a credit card.
Reason: If fraud occurs on your debit card, it is YOUR money that they have used. You should get it back eventually, but in the meantime how do you pay the mortgage, buy food, etc, etc.
If fraud occurs on your credit card, it IS NOT your money;  just tell the card company that you didn't authorise the transaction and don't pay the bill ! Plus, you get full protection of Sect 75 of the Consumer Credit Act - which can be very useful.
End of lecture ! 

BUT given that it is supposedly almost impossible to skim a pin the way they could the old swipe details, it becomes a lot harder to prove that you did not disclose the pin number to someone.  Effectively, if the PIN is used in fraud you have to prove you have never told anyone your PIN.  Try it............ ok, it might not happen but I want to minmize my risks