Attempt not to pay ? ...

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Commuter (? - looked like one!) gets in at Aldermaston, sits beside me, falls asleep.   Conductor comes round, checking tickets after Reading.  Commuter is asleep but conductor wakes him.   Commuter fumbles in pockets, conductor waits.  Eventually commuter stops fumbling, pulls out a 20 pound note and asks for "single to Paddington please". "From Aldermaston" when asked.   I wondered if this was an attempt to avoid payment ... but was a bit puzzled at this as we had already been told via tannoy to keep tickets as "barriers may be in use at Paddington".  Turns out we arrive at one of the ungated platforms, and I suspect that I watched a regular scam [attempt] going on.   No proof of course, but it smelt fishy.

Whenever I see them in action, I have to admire the cool of most conductors; just how they can remember so many people, who they've seen before and who not, I don't know.   I'm not a fan of the penalty fare system / threat that's behind it because it puts off so many genuine potential passengers (the people the railways need to attract if their to grow traffic), but I really wish at times there was a somewhat more Draconian system that caused people who regularly try to avoid paying (and no doubt get away with it sometimes) to at least have some sort of excess levied every time they get caught.

Documented really for discussion - an example of the micro / specific when at times we talk much more generally. "Case law" if you like

Edit to update title - to add "?" - see later in thread

[ChrisB]

Went on a visit to FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s REvenue Protection / anti-fraud department a couple of months ago, as a Customer Panel member - found the stories that they provided absolutely fascinating....

There is some serious fraud on the railways, and the book is rightly thrown at them. Prison sentences await for the worst, so it's really not a good idea, folks.

[vacman]

We encounter fare evaders like that every day, they are the worst kind in my view, CAN pay but WONT pay unless challenged.

[johoare]

I just wish someone sometime would check the tickets on my trains.. Fare evaders must be having a field day on them... 

[Phil]

May I humbly suggest changing the title of this topic? Maybe even just by adding a question mark.

Nobody KNOWS that this was a deliberate attempt not to pay.

Let's just suppose the commuter in question reads this, recognises himself, and happens to be a solicitor on his way to court having been up until 5am preparing his casework.

He'd have a field day!

Being smartly dressed (you say he "looks like a commuter"), carrying cash in large denomination notes and napping on a train all have perfectly reasonable explanations.

I'm not saying you're not wrong, Graham - you're probably spot-on - but, this isn't in the members only area of the forum and we should be a little circumspect about what gets placed in the public domain.

[ChrisB]

No he wouldn't - as no one knows who it is, no one can hardly be in a position even to attempt to describe them. There's no possible claim....

[grahame]

Phil ... interestingly, I did think hard before posting, wondering if I would be publishing a clue as to a train that always comes into an ungated platform at Paddington.   However (you'll see from another thread) the train was "off piste" with its platforming on his journey, so I let it go.

My original text (but not the subject) make it very clear that it looked to me like an attempt not to pay, not that it was actually what it appeared - so I don't think I've got a problem there.   Furthermore, I didn't tell you whether this was a smart commuter or not, the colour of his hair, shirt, skin or shoes ... so he can't be identified.   Highly unlikely that the person (I did give gender away) would want to draw attention to himself by getting shirty in this circumstance, even if he had a reason that I haven't thought of for needing to buy the ticket in the way he did.   However - I AM adding a "?" as it makes the title factually accurate.

P.S.  If there *is* a good reason and the gent in question (or anyone else who has found him / herself acting in this way) reads this thread, can he please get in touch and explain - then we can complete the story here, and balance it out.

[Phil]

No he wouldn't - as no one knows who it is, no one can hardly be in a position even to attempt to describe them. There's no possible claim....

I'd normally let this ride, but I'm afraid your rather confrontational approach demands a response, ChrisB.

Graham very clearly stated that [he] "looked like one" [ ie a commuter].

Graham himself is therefore clearly in a position to be able to describe said person should he be required to do so.

Pwnd.

[ChrisB]

But he hasn't, so what is your problem? Only he could describe thisd person in sufficient detail as to draw legal proceedings - and its his site?.....so maybe a PM/IM, but npt worth the posting you put up, surely?

[tramway]

Actually Graham I'm surprised you're surprised.

TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s are fully aware of the extent of fair avoidance and have decided on a level of policing that is acceptable to them. The recent 'gating' at Filton must have given First food for thought but I haven't seen an increase in revenue protection subsequently.

Everyone is complicit in this, lazy commuter who doesn't purchase ticket on the good possibility they won't be checked, but will be quite willing to pay on challenged. Onus on TOC to ensure they pay. It would be very difficult to challenge a defence that they didn't have enought time, ticket office closed etc etc. Plenty of other threads on this sort of behaviour.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

in all walks of life there are random people who are totally unable/unwilling to conform to standard procedures or the 'norm' some people are out to con you some people just dont care and others just get on with what they want to do and some people are stupid, ive done jobs serving/ interacting with customers and 95% of the time things go a set way, then someone will come along and with no good reason wont want to be rushed and wants to make themselfs feel important my using up your time its most likely just this tbh... that person at the supermarket in front of you that takes 30 mins to pack the bags dispite the huge cue and packing area provided fr example :-p

[grahame]

Actually Graham I'm surprised you're surprised.

I'm afraid I'm not ... (surprised) - didn't say I was, I don't think.  I was taking the opportunity of quote an instance / example for discussion which [just] didn't go too far in either divulging people's personal information or giving away data for others to use the same system which appears to be an attempt to travel without making payment.

I appear to have kicked off a lively debate as to my wisdom of making the post;  I've heeded Phil's suggestion of adding a tiny change to make it very clear that I'm asking if (and not stating that) this is an attempt not to pay. And - by the way - I'm excellent at remembering numbers and can't remember faces for toffee.

[vacman]

TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s are fully aware of the extent of fair avoidance and have decided on a level of policing that is acceptable to them. The recent 'gating' at Filton must have given First food for thought but I haven't seen an increase in revenue protection subsequently.

there are now 2 Inspectors in the Bristol area as a result of the Filton and other excercises

[matt473]

there are now 2 Inspectors in the Bristol area as a result of the Filton and other excercises

Moving in the right direction finally. Maybe a few floating inspectors can be hired that can move about freely on the network to areas where there are no barriers/ticket offices etc. to give more opportunities to purchase tickets for genuine passangers whilst also helping revenue duties on routes where guard may be busy with other aspects of the job such as opening doors etc.

[vacman]

Being inspectors they will be "floating", they wont just be sitting in Bristol all day.