SWT: Barrier Policy - or not !!

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

My understanding (for what it's worth ) is that you need to have 'ticked all three boxes':

1. You boarded a train at a penalty fare station;

2. You boarded a penalty fare train;

3. You bumped into an RPI^▸ (Revenue Protection Inspector (or Retail Price Index, depending on the context)) who is authorised to impose penalty fares.

C. 

[Chris from Nailsea]

What is a CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area)!?

Compulsory Ticket Area.

It was defined above, by paul7755, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=6724.msg66944#msg66944 - but I've now also added it to our 'acronyms /abbreviations' page. 

[moonrakerz]

Wow  -  I appear to have really opened a can of worms here !

I have written to SWT^▸ (South West Trains) again. I have asked them  to explain exactly what Salisbury station is. A CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area) or not ?  and how they justify denying access to (law abiding) non travellers.

I live in Warminster, I have seen NOTHING that says Warminster is a PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) station - but it appears that Westbury is (may be - possibly !).

What a complete and utter farce "!!!!

 

[super tm]

... it could be possible to buy a ticket to the next stop and use this to get through the barriers.  Then use this ticket again to come back out and request a refund as you've decided not to travel.

Generally, though, that wouldn't work, as the return part of the ticket should be retained by the barrier machine on your way back out again! 

And dont forget the ^10 admin fee for refunds.

[adc82140]

The simple answer I think is to continue issuing platform tickets, and make the penalties severe for anyone caught trying to travel on one.

Isn;t it a tradition of the railways that you can see off your loved ones?

The TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) need to concentrate their efforts on sorting out genuine fare dodgers and first class abusers rather than picking on law-abiding people who just want to make the travelling experience a bit easier for their friends/relatives.

[paul7575]

Don't you just love the complicated revenue enforcement system that privatisation has created

Nearly all the NSE^▸ (Network South East) area (and LU) had PFs^▸ (Penalty Fare) well before privatisation, ITYF...

Paul

[paul7575]

I have written to SWT^▸ (South West Trains) again. I have asked them  to explain exactly what Salisbury station is. A CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area) or not ?  and how they justify denying access to (law abiding) non travellers.
 

Good luck then - I tried to explain earlier that Salisbury might not be a CTA, indeed Salisbury should not be as FGW^▸ (First Great Western) aren't operating a schme there.

Having been through all the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) & SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about) stuff on the subject it is not clear. Lots of should and may be etc etc, there is enough for me to assume that the existence of barriers and penalty fares does not require a CTA to be in force, ; conversley, it also explains that you can have a CTA without barriers! 

When 'googling' I noticed that you raised exactly the same points in a thread in RailUK just over a month ago - so I can only assume that this one is about getting a second opinion.  One of the replies there also suggested that SWT have no CTAs...

Paul

[moonrakerz]

Good luck then - I tried to explain earlier that Salisbury might not be a CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area), indeed Salisbury should not be as FGW^▸ (First Great Western) aren't operating a schme there.

Having been through all the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) & SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about) stuff on the subject it is not clear. Lots of should and may be etc etc, there is enough for me to assume that the existence of barriers and penalty fares does not require a CTA to be in force, ; conversley, it also explains that you can have a CTA without barriers! 

When 'googling' I noticed that you raised exactly the same points in a thread in RailUK just over a month ago - so I can only assume that this one is about getting a second opinion.  One of the replies there also suggested that SWT^▸ (South West Trains) have no CTAs...

Paul

Totally agree with what you say about CTAs. What I am trying to ascertain from SWT is exactly what they are saying their "compulsory ticket area" is, if it isn't a "Compulsory Ticket Area". They seem to be imposing such an area but by not calling it one, seem to think that none of the Rules laid down by DfT apply to them !
They are allowed to set up a CTA when not all the operators operate PFs^▸ (Penalty Fare) - if abnormal circumstances apply. I have asked them what these circumstances are - again, IF the area is a formal CTA.
The Rules do indeed say that barriers are not needed to set up a CTA - but if barriers are installed it becomes a CTA (or a cta ?) by default.

I didn't really post here for a "second opinion", my previous post in another forum was just a comment in an existing thread. I was prepared to shrug my shoulders and forget the whole thing until last Saturday when having been told by SWT (in writing!) that the whole world is hell bent on travelling on their trains without paying and that they are justified in their OTT^▸ (Open Train Times website) actions by fighting back against these hordes - I arrive at the "offending station" to find it devoid of staff and all the barriers locked wide open !  That, I am afraid, got right "up my nose" !!!


Since I posted here I have had a lot of very useful information  on this subject from other forum members and comments from at least one other who experienced the same poor attitude of the staff at Salisbury.

If SWT want their "customers" to play by the Rules, it is only fair (fare?) to expect SWT to play by the same Rules - is it not ?

(As an aside:- 3 years ago I had a long saga with TV Licensing, who were threatening me with all sorts of dreadful things because I didn't have a TV Licence. I DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains) have a television and it was connected to an aerial and I did NOT have a TV Licence.
The LAW said that I did not require a licence, but TV Licensing decided that the LAW didn't apply to them and kept threatening me. In the end it took a letter from my MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) to this bunch of cowboys for them to stop. I have also banned TV Licensing from ever setting foot on my property in the future, they have acknowledged this in writing to my MP.
The "little man" does win sometimes !!!)



Edit Note: As the discussion on TV Licensing went off-topic at this point, I've moved some subsequent posts to a new topic on that particular subject, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=6737.0  Chris.

[Brucey]

that the whole world is hell bent on travelling on their trains without paying and that they are justified in their OTT^▸ (Open Train Times website) actions by fighting back against these hordes

Welcome to the world of SWT^▸ (South West Trains) - travelling with them is always like this.  They even have recorded announcements on their trains about penalty fares which play every so often.

(As an aside:- 3 years ago I had a long saga with TV Licensing, who were threatening me with all sorts of dreadful things because I didn't have a TV Licence. I DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains) have a television and it was connected to an aerial and I did NOT have a TV Licence.

I get these letters even though I have a TV Licence (all to do with my flat having both a name and a number).  You may find this website interesting where the owner has been sent threatening letters since 2006 and just ignored them.  He doesn't have a TV.  Apparently TVL haven't taken any action against them and never even visited their property.



Edit Note: As the discussion on TV Licensing went off-topic at this point, I've moved some subsequent posts to a new topic on that particular subject, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=6737.0  Chris.

[vacman]

Firstly, Penalty Fares are nothing to do with privatisation, they were introduced by BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) in 1989 across the NSE^▸ (Network South East) area when they realised that their stupid, short sighted "open stations" policy was being abused, BR then introduced them in the midlands in the early 90's.

You cannot be PF^▸ (Penalty Fare)'d from Westbury to Salisbury as it is out of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) area, but plans are afoot to extend to Pompey I believe (basicly just becoming part of the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) scheme)

[paul7575]

Welcome to the world of SWT^▸ (South West Trains) - travelling with them is always like this.  They even have recorded announcements on their trains about penalty fares which play every so often.

I'd be surprised if regular announcements aren't a requirement of the scheme - it's somewhere in all those rules we've been reading isn't it?

My experience of SWT in South Hants is that they are pretty much normal in the way they operate the PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) scheme. In the London suburbs, and some particular areas like Cosham to Fratton, passengers just take the pi$$, and the heavy handed approach there reflects that situation...  The fact that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) sevices through Portsmouth are not PF trains just causes confusion, and a major loophole AFAICT^▸ (as far as I can tell), and the sooner they change the better for everyone who takes the trouble to always buy a ticket.

Paul

[IainH]

Right so meanwhile back on the thread, I think we can say...

Salisbury is not a pure PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) station, so therefore the requirements from DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) to have an arrangement to allow platform tickets or similar do not apply.

Although one could argue that as the same rules (4. say that you can only create a CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area) if all operators have penalty fares, and as we have established here that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) don't, then it seems there is a further issue as you can legitimately board an FGW train at salisbury with no ticket (if you are happy to pay the full undiscounted fare) and so there isn't actually a CTA, just a barriered area.

I'll try to buy a platform ticket at Waterloo next time I'm there, which I'm pretty sure is 100% PF.

In fact I might just get one for Southwark underground, where presumably there are no "less than honest" people....

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/4395

as no less than Boris is happy with them being issued there.

But the platforms are 'private', technically, and this does appear to be a loophole that allows station operators to annoy people genuinely seeing off / meeting others. It will be interesting to see what SWT^▸ (South West Trains) come back with to moonrakerz.

[Brucey]

So Bath Spa, for example, wouldn't be a CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area) because of the one XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) service (coughs, ORCATS^▸ (Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services) raid) per day?

Just to clarify: The point I made earlier about privatisation causing confusion wasn't meant to say that private companies brought in PFs^▸ (Penalty Fare), but rather to highlight the confusion it causes when different companies have different policies at the same station (and how this becomes a loophole for fare evaders).

[paul7575]

So Bath Spa, for example, wouldn't be a CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area) because of the one XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) service (coughs, ORCATS^▸ (Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services) raid) per day?

AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) even if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) made Bath Spa a PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) station, it still wouldn't be for SWT^▸ (South West Trains), unless they also went to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) with a proposal to extend their area to include the route, and perhaps those odd FGW stations like Dean and Mottisfont & Dunbridge where only SWT call.  AFAICS^▸ (As Far As I Can See) the publicly available rules seem to be written for stand alone schemes, as I can't find anything about 'piggy backing onto existing areas - although surprisingly, when I looked at some of the PF warning notices I passed yesterday, lo and behold FGW's name appears there alongside SWT, Southern and FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect) - even where FGW never call!

As an aside, apparently taking in the odd new station isn't necessarily considered cost effective, which is alleged to be why Chandlers Ford is not a PF station. There was too much of an admin cost to make it one...

Paul

[inspector_blakey]

Chris, you can in theory be charged a PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) for being inside a Compulsory Ticket Area without a ticket - the Docklands Light Railway is an example.

However, a CTA^▸ (Compulsory Ticket Area) has to be clearly marked and signposted - in the case of the DLR^▸ (Docklands Light Railway) there are clearly worded warning posters and lines marked on the floor that define the CTA. I believe the same requirements apply to an CTAs on the mainline network.

I'm not actually aware of any CTAs at any FGW^▸ (First Great Western)-served stations, although I could be wrong. In any case, a CTA is not defined by ticket barriers but must be very clearly marked, with signs warning explicitly that you will be charged a PF if you enter without a ticket. In fact there used to be a sign at the top of the stairs leading to Platform 2 at Bath Spa announcing, before even the days of penalty fares, "this is a compulsory ticket area". This sign however was completely unenforceable in law and complete b*llsh*t - that station has never had a CTA. I note it's been removed now!