£600 Fine Threat

[RealName]

As my station is often unmanned and the machine only accepts cards, I always ask the conductor before I board the train (or, like today, I wait in the doorway for them to walk down if they're up the other end and then ask) if I can purchase a ticket. On every occasion apart from today I have been told that I can. However, today the conductor told me to get off the train. When I asked why he refused to give me a reason, only telling me that 'I knew why'. I ignored him and sat on the train at which point he came up to me and told me that the train wouldn't be leaving the station until I either paid a £600 fine or got off the train. I asked him what the fine was for, but still all he would say was 'You know why.' A £600 fine is obviously a lot more than the fine for travelling without a ticket, so I'm wondering if it could be for something else? The company in question is First Great Western if that makes any difference.

[Stigy]

Sounds like mistaken identity to me, lol. Did he mistake you for a fare evader? You shouldn't have boarded the train without a ticket if there were facilities available to buy one, without seeking permission first. There is no £600 fine, just the cost of the ticket, a Penalty Fare of £20 or twice the cost of the full single fare, which ever is the greater, or summons to a Magistrate's court. Only the court can issue said fine, and even then it's more than likely going to be nothing like £600. Sounds to me like a Guard who likes his scare mongering, although he didn't have to carry you on his train if you could have bought a ticket before you boarded.

[RealName]

Mistaken identity was my first thought. However, I forgot to specify before that he told me that I could catch the next train, which seems strange if I've been mistaken for someone not allowed to travel. So there's nothing that First Great Western are able to issue a £600 fine for any reason?

[timbo58]

Sounds like mistaken identity to me, lol. Did he mistake you for a fare evader? You shouldn't have boarded the train without a ticket if there were facilities available to buy one, without seeking permission first. There is no £600 fine, just the cost of the ticket, a Penalty Fare of £20 or twice the cost of the full single fare, which ever is the greater, or summons to a Magistrate's court. Only the court can issue said fine, and even then it's more than likely going to be nothing like £600. Sounds to me like a Guard who likes his scare mongering, although he didn't have to carry you on his train if you could have bought a ticket before you boarded.

 

Yes, I would tend to agree with all these very good points, definitely no such £600 fine, PFs don't apply to most of FGWs routes and so I agree, the TM was scaremongering, possibly because he misidentified you.

Perhaps the TM was unaware the station was unmanned or could only accept cards?

On that particular point I thought that ALL of the automatic ticket machines that FGW have installed took cash as well as cards?

IF that IS the case then his statement 'you could catch the next train' would seem to make sense.

 

It would help if you identify the station and time of day you were travelling, as I could check what the situation was then.

 

I was a RP manager for that very company for some years, so I really DO know!

[RPI]

One point Timbo, PF's now apply on most FGW routes as they were finally implemented in April this year after many years of false starts.

[RealName]

My station (Bramley) is a penalty fare station, but due to the situation the staff on board the trains and at Basingstoke don't give out penalty fares for failing to get a ticket prior to boarding the train there. I hadn't seen this particular guard before, so it's possible that he's new and isn't aware of the situation.

 

The machines used to take cash but the local chavs stole the money from them on numerous occasions, so now they're card only.

 

I forget what time it was that I was travelling, but I can confirm that the ticket office was locked as the man who works there didn't turn up until a couple of minutes before the next train arrived. I'm curious as to how you'd know if someone was there or not. I assume there's a list of hours during which the station is supposed to be manned? If that's the case then he's often not there when he's supposed to be (I wonder if he gets paid for all those hours he's missing...).

 

Thanks for confirming that there is no such £600 fine.

 

I have some more questions though, which are related to another incident. Yesterday on the way home from Waterloo for the third time I was asked to produce my outbound ticket upon showing my return ticket. As I don't place this ticket back in the plastic wallet after putting it through the barriers at Waterloo I struggle to find it. As I haven't shown it immediately all three conductors have told me that I'll have to pay a penalty fare for not having my outbound ticket along with my return ticket. When I do eventually find it though, they move on without issuing a PF. The thing that really annoys me about this is the fact that no-one else within my vicinity on all three occasions was asked to show their outbound ticket (most of the others are businessmen on their way home, so they're definitely not avoiding it due to their current journey being outbound).

 

Is it right that I can be issued a penalty fare for not having my outbound ticket during my return journey? There are a number of stations that don't give the ticket back after it's been used, which makes me reluctant to use barriers if I'm not sure that I'll get the ticket back.

 

Also, I was under the impression that standard conductors are unable to issue penalty fares? South West Trains' website says so at least:

 

"Only those who have been specifically trained as authorized collectors can charge you a penalty fare. Authorised collectors carry an authorised collectors identification badge, which must be shown upon request."

 

southwesttrains.co.uk/penaltyfares.aspx#64524

 

What are those who aren't authorized collectors able to do in such situations?

[Stigy]

Is it right that I can be issued a penalty fare for not having my outbound ticket during my return journey? There are a number of stations that don't give the ticket back after it's been used, which makes me reluctant to use barriers if I'm not sure that I'll get the ticket back.

 

Also, I was under the impression that standard conductors are unable to issue penalty fares? South West Trains' website says so at least:

 

"Only those who have been specifically trained as authorized collectors can charge you a penalty fare. Authorised collectors carry an authorised collectors identification badge, which must be shown upon request."

 

southwesttrains.co.uk/penaltyfares.aspx#64524

 

What are those who aren't authorized collectors able to do in such situations?

No, there's no obligation to show your outbound ticket on your return journey. As you rightly say, ticket barriers often retain the outbound ticket once used, and this isn't a fault, as they're supposed to do so. Are you sure it's the outbound ticket that the Guard asks to see on your return journney? If for example you could only produce your outbound ticket on your return journey, as opposed to the correct ticket for your return journey, then yes, you can become liable for a Penalty Fare at the Revenue Protection staff's discretion.

 

Guards or Conductors cannot issue Penalty Fares, as only Reveny Protection staff can issue them, on SWT at least. I suppose if they had the relavent training then they could become authorised collectors like RPIs/RPAs are, but due to the responsibility of the Guard primarily being that of the safety of the train, I doubt very much that any company would want their Guards/Conductors issuing PFs.

[RealName]

Definitely the outbound as I have looked at the ticket I'm showing and have asked why I'm being asked to show my outbound ticket. I was given the reason that I may have found or stolen the return ticket and they wanted proof that I'd purchased the ticket.

 

So if I'm asked for my details by a conductor I'm under no obligation to give them? Also, regarding the earlier incident where I was asked to get off the train. Do I have to leave the train if I'm not being provided with a reason as to why I must get off, or if the reason isn't lawfully valid? For example in the past I was told by a conductor that he didn't want girly-boys (I have long hair) on board his train and that I would have to leave.

[Stigy]

Definitely the outbound as I have looked at the ticket I'm showing and have asked why I'm being asked to show my outbound ticket. I was given the reason that I may have found or stolen the return ticket and they wanted proof that I'd purchased the ticket.

 

So if I'm asked for my details by a conductor I'm under no obligation to give them? Also, regarding the earlier incident where I was asked to get off the train. Do I have to leave the train if I'm not being provided with a reason as to why I must get off, or if the reason isn't lawfully valid? For example in the past I was told by a conductor that he didn't want girly-boys (I have long hair) on board his train and that I would have to leave.

I've been thinking about this actually...I'm not entirely sure that the ticket barriers retain an outbound ticket, or if it's just the return they retain after a journey is completed? Either way, I can't see any reason why you'd need to provide the part of the ticket that you've already used.

 

A Conductor or Guard can legally ask you for your details if he or she believes an offence has been committed. Any member of staff of a Train Operating Company can do this. If you're asked to leave the train for no good reason, the Guard is in the wrong. I'd say it depends on the situation, although if requested to leave a train by any authorised official, I'd be inclined to do so, after having ascertained the reason why I was required to leave the train. If you think that the reason is an invalid one, I'd complain to the Train Operating Company. At the end of the day, the Guard can only act on the information he has, as as the train is 'his' train, what he says, goes I'm afraid.

 

There is a byelaw that states you must leave railway property (ie a train), if requested to do so for being reasonably believed to have commited a byelaw offence, and if you refuse, reasonable force is allowed to be used. There's also a byelaw that states you need to provide your details when suspected of committing another byelaw offence. Bear in mind that when requesting your details the staff member needs to advise you of what you have allegedly done wrong. If you're asked for your name and address, but the Guard wont tell you what he believes you have done wrong, I'd recommend he calls the BTP. Sometimes it's easier to do as they say though, lol.

 

Basically it's the duty of any staff member to be clear in what they believe you have done before attempting to enforce a railway byelaw.

[Grotesque]

in the past I was told by a conductor that he didn't want girly-boys (I have long hair) on board his train and that I would have to leave.

 

Mildly bizarre to say the least.

Am not sure exactly what byelaw your hair would have been in breach of on that occasion.

[Old-CodJA]

You may be asked to leave a train in accordance with National Railways Byelaws (2005) 24.2, or Section 103 of The Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, but you do have the right to be informed of exactly how you have infringed these legislations at the time of the request.

 

In respect of the two-part ticket, if rail staff believe that an offence may have been committed they may ask for production of the 'other' half of your ticket for verification and it is reasonable to do so.

 

For example, if an unstamped outward half issued at say 7 a.m is being used late in the day it might suggest that the ticket has already been used earlier. Sight of the return half might reveal an examination mark, or reading the encoding by swiping through an avantix machine may show that it has been through a barrier gate.

 

An outward half of a two-part ticket cannot be used if you cannot show the unexamined return half of that ticket at the time of inspection. There are many codes on most tickets that help rail revenue staff to identify what a ticket is and how it must be used.

 

I can think of a few reasons that an inspector might want to see the 'other' half of any ticket, but not if a it is just a return half, which is being used in the right direction of travel and by an unaccompanied traveller within the 'conditions of issue and use' relating to that particular ticket.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Old-CodJA

[timbo58]

One point Timbo, PF's now apply on most FGW routes as they were finally implemented in April this year after many years of false starts.

 

Ah, I left them at the end of summer 2009, so that is news to me.

I never thought they would actually implement them as I found in my previous role that FGW seemed to forever delay revenue protection measures despite the excellent work the RP department did in proving these were very necessary.

 

I would say some of the reports on here of silly comments from staff and over zealous behaviour are obviously the minority and I can't think of many (I worked for 'High speed' or Intercity as it was known as a proper company!) that were there with me that would be so stupid.

Saying that FG as a whole seemed (seems?) hell bent on recruiting unintelligent brown-nosers in management IME so it wouldn't surprise me if there was a dumbing down in staff recruited elsewhere.

Just my opinion: no offence to the learned people on here who probably know exactly what I mean!8-)

[Wriggler7]

I know what you mean about 'dumbing down' of staff. When 'I were a lad (I served a term)' there was a very high degree of professionalism in the TSSA grades. Now, my big gripe about 'railways' tends to be 'staff attitude', and I most certainly can tell the difference between BR and 'new' staff.

 

That said, I am having a belief problem with this thread. I cannot believe that 'long hair' would draw a comment. I do wonder if there are 'things' about this incident that we are missing.

[Wriggler7]

As to what type of staff can/cannot issue penalty fares, that is down to the train operator, as long as they stick within the relevant 'penalty fare scheme'. LTS Rail (as was) authorized 'conductors' and 'guards' for a while, as well as some 'Burns' security staff (employed by 'Burns security', under contract to LTS Rail) I think it was the '1986 Train Crew Agreement' that restricted 'penalty fares' to Senior Conductors, Ticket Inspectors, and not 'conductors, guards, ticket examiners' as well as allowing some other grade related restrictive practices. Most of those 'old agreements' seem to have been torn up, both the good bits and the bad bits, and train operators do seem to try to 'do what they want'.

 

The 'law' creates a distinction in the level of authority allowed to 'an officer of the railway' and a 'servant of the railway', and my 'observations' of my local line is that 'management' fail to understand those distinctions. There are 'contract staff' turning up, mainly in the 'lowest level' of 'customer facing roles' all over the line. Paid peanuts, poorly equipped, and very poorly trained. I cannot think of any other industry where 'customers first contact' with the business is left to the least capable/competent people. And it is grossly unfair to those contract staff, as well as the 'customer'. (When did they stop being passengers?) Still,with this weather, I will be working from home today, and won't see how they cope with 'the snow'.

[Old-CodJA]

I agree totally Wriggler7. Like you, I can tell in an instant whether particular staff were employed in the job pre-1994 and not just because of the fact that they may be the older ones:-)

 

There are a number of companies employing 'contract staff' in front-line roles where even a basic grasp of revenue protection rules and principles seems woefully lacking and even worse, an understanding of the legal position may be non-existent. Proper training is the first pre-requisite for achieving a good job.

 

Right too in the comment regarding the references to 'customers'. The Law makes no such distinction, describing all travellers by a railway as 'passengers' as you well know.