Angry commuters start fightback against fines

[whole diary]

[broadgage]

Whilst in general I would side with the railway as regards enforcement of terms and conditions, I seen some unreasonable enforcement.

One of the worst was a family with A/P tickets valid only on a particular train, they were well aware of this restriction.
They boarded a train of the correct TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company), from the usual platform, at the advertised time, believing this to be in order.
On board they were told that in fact they were on the preceeding train, which was running late and which therefore left at the time at which the correct train should have left.
As a result they had to pay hundreds of pounds and vowed never to use the train again.

Another group on the same train, similarly affected, when told to pay again simply said "F**k off, or we will sort you out" I dont think that they paid again !

Whilst I do not support threatening to assualt those doing their job, one can see why some might be tempted to make threats.
One group meekly paid up, and no doubt consider that the railway had stolen some hundreds of pounds from them.
The other group saved a similar amount by being threatening.

[Milky Bar Kid]

It is about reading the T&C's!! I deal with people on advance tickets all day long, the rules are easy to understand, they have to be enforcable else its not fair on the fare paying passenger paying x amount to travel then matey comes along with ^10 ap ticket and makes out he didnt realise he was on the train. The easiest way to simplify things would be to axe them.

[vacmanfan]

Same applies on airlines.  You book a CHEAP ticket for a certain plane at a certain time.  If you miss it, tough.  If you pay more (not on ALL airlines, granted) you are given flexibility with your ticket.  We need tighter control BEFORE people get on trains to avoid situations such as outlined above.  Unfortunately that is near on impossible. 

[Btline]

It is about reading the T&C's!!

As I have already said, reading the T&Cs is not what this is about!
It's whether they are fair, appropriate and whether discretion is used.

Same applies on airlines.  You book a CHEAP ticket for a certain plane at a certain time.  If you miss it, tough.  If you pay more (not on ALL airlines, granted) you are given flexibility with your ticket.  We need tighter control BEFORE people get on trains to avoid situations such as outlined above.  Unfortunately that is near on impossible. 

The railways are different to the airlines. For the most part, we run a turn up and go railway on mainlines. We run the most frequent trains between our cities compared to anywhere in the world. If you miss the train to Manchester, why can't you just get the next one 20 minutes later? Why do the railways penalise such people when they've already bought a ticket and it won't cost the railways a penny to carry them on the next service?

Yes, we should leave enough time... blah blah. Sometimes it doesn't happen whether it's your fault, the traffic, or whether it's been a bad day. It's called life.

Of course it should be noted that you have to check in an hour (at least) before most flights. Another way the turn up and go railway is different to the airlines. Or shall we make it that commuters travelling to Machester have to check in 2 hours before the train leaves (doubling the journey time)? I bet that would stop AP ticket holders missing the train!

[Southern Stag]

If you miss the train to Manchester, why can't you just get the next one 20 minutes later? Why do the railways penalise such people when they've already bought a ticket and it won't cost the railways a penny to carry them on the next service?

Because if people were just allowed to catch any service with an AP ticket why would anybody ever buy a walk up ticket? Just buy any AP for any train, you'll be allowed to travel whenever you want. The railway would lose so much revenue. Allowing people who get on the wrong train with AP off is unfair on those people who use AP properly, and catch the right train even if it's not convenient to them and those who pay the price for flexibility by buying a walk up ticket.

[John R]

If you miss the train to Manchester, why can't you just get the next one 20 minutes later? Why do the railways penalise such people when they've already bought a ticket and it won't cost the railways a penny to carry them on the next service?

Because if people were just allowed to catch any service with an AP ticket why would anybody ever buy a walk up ticket? Just buy any AP for any train, you'll be allowed to travel whenever you want. The railway would lose so much revenue. Allowing people who get on the wrong train with AP off is unfair on those people who use AP properly, and catch the right train even if it's not convenient to them and those who pay the price for flexibility by buying a walk up ticket.

Quite right Southern Stag. Very succinctly put.

Interesting that if you buy tickets for the "London Games" (note the lack of O.....cs or 2..2 - how the railway is supposed to publicise tickets when they're not allowed to use the name of the event I don't know) then you get a special dispensation in that the advance tickets on the return journey are valid for up to 3 hours after the time on the ticket (although you lose the reserved seat of course). This is very sensible for an event where the finish times and travel times back to main line stations are somewhat unpredictable. However.... when you actually book the tickets through the special site, all the warnings on the (Mixing Deck) website still say that your ticket is only valid as usual, so once again, the railway is not making it very clear as to what the terms are.

   

[EBrown]

Yes, we should leave enough time... blah blah. Sometimes it doesn't happen whether it's your fault, the traffic, or whether it's been a bad day. It's called life.

If you miss a train, that's life.

While this article is about being fair, there is an argument for the system being unfair in places, but, the Terms and Conditions lay out your rights very clearly, so it is about reading them. My tenancy agreement isn't fair by your measure as it can penalise me for things that aren't my fault, oh, but look, it's in the conditions I agreed to.

Can't stick to a booked train, buy a Single or Return not AP.

[ellendune]

The issue of unfairness is that most such terms in a contract merely reimburse the other party for their loss.  In the case of the wrong train, that would be the diference between the AP fare and the full single fare for that leg of the journey.  That is fair.  Any more is a penalty which is difficult to enforce through contract law.  That is why the penalty fares system is not enforced through contract law. 

The argument that if you didn't hve a penalty then everone would try it on is also false.  It is merely an argument for better ticket checks.  I went both ways to Paddington on Friday and did not have my ticket checked at all on the way in and only at the lasts minute on the way back.  Since I was using a split ticket I only ever needed to show my super off peak single from Didcot to Swindon. 

An attitude that all passenegers are on the fiddle and we must therefore penalise them at every opportunity is the complete antithesis of customer care.  Thankfully there are many railway staff who seem to be able to be polite and helpful while enforceing the system.  The abolition of this ridiculous rule would help them and would bring much more public support for the rail industry.   

I would also suggest that those staff who enforce the rules in a polite manner are much less likely to receive abuse in return (though I regret I cannot say that they would never receive abuse). 

[mjones]

It is all very well saying "rules are rules", "read the T&Cs" etc etc, but that just makes rail travel look like a terribly restrictive, officious, customer unfriendly system run by jobsworths;  and completely forgets that the main competitor for rail isn't air (where everyone has to book, and everyone knows it) but road, where no-one has to book and the same rules apply to every journey.  We've lots of people on this forum who are regular rail travellers, fully familiar with the rules etc, but how is someone who rarely travels by train supposed to know every rule and the exceptions to it? it isn't as if things are consistent- you can buy a ticket on some trains, but on others you will be penalised for it. Yes there are signs at the stations, I know that, people here know that, but is it really fair to expect every new passenger to have to read every poster at the start of their journey to know the rules? Or is rail travel something for an informed minority only?  

If the rail industry wants everyone to have a ticket before boarding then they should provide enough staff at those stations to ensure that  people don't board without a ticket, and to allow  people to  buy one without having to queue for ages. A machine is not sufficient, especially for the infrequent traveller; and all too often they don't work. And one of the consequences of the way things are done at the moment is that people with honest intentions, offering to pay, are all too often treated exactly the same way as those caught trying to evade fares. Criminalising honest mistakes is not natural justice; and stories like those in the media are doing the industry no favours at all, at a time when its image is not great anyway.

I'm certainly not saying you should be allowed on any train with an AP ticket, just because you feel like it, but there isn't actually any good reason why you shouldn't be able pay the excess instead of being effectively fined. If it is really necessary to have a disincentive then an appropriate administrative charge could be added for each change of ticket, but that should be all.

The airline comparison is a red-herring. As others have pointed out rail travel is very different, only a minority of tickets are booked ahead, and in any case you can't board an aeroplane without a ticket so there isn't any possibility of being unexpectedly charged hundreds of pounds once you have started your journey. And the  Ryan Air "read the rules or else"  attitude to customer service is not widely admired in the industry and I would hope not regarded as a model for the railways...

[EBrown]

It is all very well saying "rules are rules", "read the T&Cs" etc etc, but that just makes rail travel look like a terribly restrictive,

Not really, the more you pay, the less restrictions. Chose the correct ticket, what's is the problem?

Restrictive ticket (AP): Very Cheap
Less Restrictive ticket (Off-Peak): Cheap
Virtually no restriction ticket (Anytime): Expensive

What passengers seem to want is an AP price ticket with less restrictions, but that won't happen as less restrictions means more expense. Either way, the railway will lose.

Jobsworth, what a lovely word that seems, now, to be a term to describe someone who follows their job description.

What needs to be done (and is done to an extent with the new CoC^▸ (Chamber of Commerce TBA)) is publicise the rules better.

[ellendune]

mjones - I couldn't agree with you more.  Well said.

[Btline]

Restrictive ticket (AP): Very Cheap
Less Restrictive ticket (Off-Peak): Cheap
Virtually no restriction ticket (Anytime): Expensive

I would argue that long distance advances (cough - XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise))) are not "very cheap".
I would argue that most long distance Off Peak tickets are no longer "cheap".

I'm not saying that AP ticket holders should be let on any train. But why not x train and the one after? Or 1 hour before/after x o'clock. The railway loses no money (apart from "fines" when people miss their booked train and have to buy a new ticket).

The railway would probably make more money if it had reasonably priced fares (i.e. not very cheap but cheap) valid with more flexibility.

The Olympics tickets are such a good idea. Why not make all advances like that? Or have a ^5 surcharge to validate it on any train for 3 hours.

[EBrown]

Or have a ^5 surcharge to validate it on any train for 3 hours.

That could work, but, lets say you are taking a Virgin Train (and travelling First Class), you are booked on a service that doesn't serve dinner, but wish to change to one that does. Is ^5 fair to the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)?

Everyone knows XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) are special!

An attitude that all passenegers are on the fiddle and we must therefore penalise them at every opportunity is the complete antithesis of customer care.  Thankfully there are many railway staff who seem to be able to be polite and helpful while enforceing the system.  The abolition of this ridiculous rule would help them and would bring much more public support for the rail industry.

I think you are tarnishing too many TOCs with the FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect) brush! I don't think abolishing "the rule" will help, people will still complain that excessing to a full price ticket isn't fair.

[vacman]

The truth of the matter is that a lot of discretion is already used, quite often when someone is late for whatever reason and they go to the ticket office or customer service desk they will get their ticket endorsed for the next train, the people who end up getting sold new tickets or PF^▸ (Penalty Fare)'d are the ones who just get on the train without asking or making any effort to see a member of staff, i'm afraid that if you are naive enough to think that you can get a ticket from Plymouth to Padd for ^15.00 and have no strings attached then frankly it could be argued that they deserve to get charged up! And some of these sob stories in the papers are utter tripe, I've had it on many occasions "The man on the platform told me it was OK", oh really? what, at the last station? where there was one member of staff who incidently was a woman! oh yes, had that one many times!

[Btline]

That could work, but, lets say you are taking a Virgin Train (and travelling First Class), you are booked on a service that doesn't serve dinner, but wish to change to one that does. Is ^5 fair to the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)?

Obviously First Class and peak hour trains are different. I'm not advocating someone on a ^1 fare booked on the 12 noon blagging to get on the 1730....

I am thinking about the Off Peak VT^▸ (Virgin Trains - former franchises) services that cart around fresh air...
Perhaps ^10 London to B'ham on the 1403. ^15 on any train in 14xx.
I think Vt would be suprised that the number of people who would pay the extra. Certainly, if it gives the commuter an extra 15 minute to have that second glass of wine at lunch...