My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
holiday in Japan!

Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt that
he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate attempt to
defraud the railway and that he will be prosecuted. He took the
railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post

My son is very upset about it, really doesn't understand what he did
to annoy the inspector so much and mortified - never having been in
any kind of trouble before. I have absolutely no experience of such
things and do not know at all what to expect either.

Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
afford this.

Any advice welcome as I am very worried,

Kath

"Phil"  wrote in message 
news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...

> My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
> on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
> that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
> holiday in Japan!
>
> Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
> prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt that
> he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate attempt to
> defraud the railway and that he will be prosecuted. He took the
> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>
> My son is very upset about it, really doesn't understand what he did
> to annoy the inspector so much and mortified - never having been in
> any kind of trouble before. I have absolutely no experience of such
> things and do not know at all what to expect either.
>
> Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
> make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
> will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
> a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
> afford this.
>
> Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>
> Kath
>
>

The inspector is not allowed to tell your son he will be prosecuted, merely 
reported!!
Was he cautioned?
Were notes made at the time?
Was your son asked to sign the notes?
What Company does the inspector work for.

"4sub"  wrote in message
news:ddt5cj$llc$1@newsm1.svr.pol.co.uk...

>
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
> > My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
> > on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
> > that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
> > holiday in Japan!
> >
> > Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
> > prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt that
> > he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate attempt to
> > defraud the railway and that he will be prosecuted. He took the
> > railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
> >
> > My son is very upset about it, really doesn't understand what he did
> > to annoy the inspector so much and mortified - never having been in
> > any kind of trouble before. I have absolutely no experience of such
> > things and do not know at all what to expect either.
> >
> > Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
> > make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
> > will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
> > a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
> > afford this.
> >
> > Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
> >
> > Kath
> >
> >
> The inspector is not allowed to tell your son he will be prosecuted,
merely
> reported!!
> Was he cautioned?
> Were notes made at the time?
> Was your son asked to sign the notes?
> What Company does the inspector work for.
>
>


what was the inspectors RPO number?

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:34:43 +0100, Phil  wrote:


>My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>holiday in Japan!


Not again.  It makes a mockery of the whole sensible idea of a Penalty
Fare.

I have done exactly this, incidentally, but had it pointed out at a
booking office.  I "got away with"[1] 3 return journeys between
Aughton Park and Manchester before it was noticed and pointed out.

[1] I actually "got away with" nothing, because if you always want a
YP card continuously between your 16th birthday and two days before
your 27th you'll buy the same number of cards, regardless of any gap
between them, so long as that gap never exceeds one year.  This is why
I found the "18 month railcard" offer after Great Heck downright
offensive to regulars - over 7 years it was effectively a zero-cost
option.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:34:43 +0100, Phil  wrote:


>My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>holiday in Japan!
>
>Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive?


From my limited understanding (not being a lawyer), he could only be
convicted in court if it were proved beyond reasonable doubt that he
deliberately avoided paying the correct fare. So I don't think you
have too much to worry about. In fact the whole purpose of penalty
fares is that they are a way of punishing people whom there's no point
taking to court as they have no chance of proving this.


>Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
>prepared to pay the penalty fare


This may have been what set the inspector off - they often assume that
if you ask to pay the penalty fare, you must be trying to avoid a
court appearance and therefore be a deliberate dodger.

"asdf" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:g1c4g157k223cduekuedr8n0ili8i2bu8j@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:34:43 +0100, Phil  wrote:
>
>>My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>>on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>>that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>>holiday in Japan!

>>Although my son says he was apologetic, got his wallet out and was
>>prepared to pay the penalty fare
>
> This may have been what set the inspector off - they often assume that
> if you ask to pay the penalty fare, you must be trying to avoid a
> court appearance and therefore be a deliberate dodger.


So what are you supposed to do, so as *not* to "set the inspector off"? 
Offering to pay the difference between the child fare and the adult fare - 
plus a penalty fare if they *really* insist - would seem to be the sensible 
reaction to learning that you've unwittingly claimed a discount that you 
weren't entitled to. Arguing the toss, trying to offer futile excuses, or 
being generally obnoxious, would seem to be the actions of someone who knows 
he's guilty; offering to pay whatever is owed would seem to be the action of 
someone who's made a genuine mistake.

As a matter of interest, where did he buy the ticket - at a ticket office or 
from a machine? Shouldn't a ticket office have asked to see the discount 
card and checked that it was still valid?

"Phil"  wrote in message
news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...


> He took the
> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>

Without commenting on other issues, removal of the card was, IMHO,
reasonable - it had no further value to your son as it had expired, and in
any event, from the terms and conditions of issue of the card:
'3. The Railcard does not become your property and if requested must be
handed in to a representative of any Train Company.'

Peter

Martin Underwood asked:

>
> As a matter of interest, where did he buy the ticket - at a ticket
> office or from a machine?


He bought it from a machine.
In her second paragraph the OP wrote:

"the inspector said that he felt that he had purchased the ticket at a
machine in a deliberate attempt to defraud the railway".

-- 
DB.

"DB."  wrote in message
news:_crMe.15$K85.6@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...

> Martin Underwood asked:
> >
> > As a matter of interest, where did he buy the ticket - at a ticket
> > office or from a machine?
>
> He bought it from a machine.
> In her second paragraph the OP wrote:
>
> "the inspector said that he felt that he had purchased the ticket at a
> machine in a deliberate attempt to defraud the railway".


Eh? That just shows that the inspector felt that he had purchased the ticket
from a machine - not that he did in fact do so.

Regards

Jonathan

"Peter Masson"  wrote in message 
news:ddterf$f0i$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
>
>> He took the
>> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>>
> Without commenting on other issues, removal of the card was, IMHO,
> reasonable - it had no further value to your son as it had expired, and in
> any event, from the terms and conditions of issue of the card:
> '3. The Railcard does not become your property and if requested must be
> handed in to a representative of any Train Company.'
>
> Peter
>
>

I agree, over things don't sound right though.
Trouble with these things, two sides of the story and in the middle the 
truth

Whats the badge number reached these days. Mine, RPI No 5.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:29:51 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
 wrote:


>"Phil"  wrote in message
>news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
>
>> He took the
>> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>>
>Without commenting on other issues, removal of the card was, IMHO,
>reasonable - it had no further value to your son as it had expired, and in
>any event, from the terms and conditions of issue of the card:
>'3. The Railcard does not become your property and if requested must be
>handed in to a representative of any Train Company.'
>
>Peter
>


Yes I agree with that the railcard is of no further use anyway. It is
the threat of presecution which is worrying us. We don't know what to
expect next.

In answer to a few of your questions:

The train company was Thameslink.

All that was given to my son was a small slip allowing him to travel
home. The inspector has written TL139 on it - is that his number?

He was cautioned which scared him a bit ... not the sort of thing you
expect to happen on a day out. Then he was asked to sign notes the
inspector took after that point.

And the ticket was purchased at a machine, he always uses a machine
rather than queue, our station only has one ticket window and although
small is quite busy (Flitwick). But the inspector thought he had used
a machine to avoid showing his ticket.

>
> Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
> make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
> will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
> a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
> afford this.
>
> Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>


I would suggest you also try posting this over on uk.legal.

They seem quite knowledgable over there but not really the sort you
might find here mixing with the trainspotters.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:22:50 +0100, "Martin Underwood" 
wrote:


>>>Although my son says he was apologetic, got his wallet out and was
>>>prepared to pay the penalty fare
>>
>> This may have been what set the inspector off - they often assume that
>> if you ask to pay the penalty fare, you must be trying to avoid a
>> court appearance and therefore be a deliberate dodger.
>
>So what are you supposed to do, so as *not* to "set the inspector off"? 


From the stories I've heard, the best approach if you find yourself in
this situation seems to be to stress to the inspector that you refuse
to pay any sort of penalty fare, as you're not a criminal or fare
dodger and it was only by accident that you found yourself without a
valid ticket. (Pretend you don't know that penalty fares are *meant*
for people who do so accidentally.) This approach seems to be the one
most likely to lead to being hit with a penalty fare (which you then
grudgingly pay) rather than a court appearance.

It's unfortunate that the proper outcome seems to be best achieved
through antagonism.

Bear in mind though that this is based on purely anecdotal evidence.
I've been lucky enough to have never had the chance to try it out
myself.

"allan tracy"  wrote in message 
news:1124222858.754833.47600@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> >
>> Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>> make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>> will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
>> a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
>> afford this.
>>
>> Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>>
>
> I would suggest you also try posting this over on uk.legal.
>
> They seem quite knowledgable over there but not really the sort you
> might find here mixing with the trainspotters.
>
>

YOU WHAT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

allan tracy wrote:

>I would suggest you also try posting this over on uk.legal.


Don't be stupid.

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

"Phil"  wrote in message 
news:rkh4g1ti9dq03lskhpr54k7pfn2v93s4ac@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:29:51 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"

> He was cautioned which scared him a bit ... not the sort of thing you
> expect to happen on a day out. Then he was asked to sign notes the
> inspector took after that point.
>


What are the implications/consequences of refusing to sign the inspectors 
notes?

In no way do I condone fare evasion, but heavy handed enforcement on "soft" 
targets seems designed to put young people off public transport for life.


James

"allan tracy"  wrote in message 
news:1124222858.754833.47600@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> >
>> Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>> make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>> will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
>> a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
>> afford this.
>>
>> Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>>
>
> I would suggest you also try posting this over on uk.legal.
>
> They seem quite knowledgable over there but not really the sort you
> might find here mixing with the trainspotters.
>
>
>

I was
Blocking in
Collecting off
Follow ups
BR sandwiches
Superior class riding
Plain Clothes
Dropping excess fares
Shooting pigeons at the sin bins
AND chief Ticket Inspector for the southern region
in 1986 and you were ...........

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:48:26 +0100, "4sub"  wrote:


>
>"Phil"  wrote in message 
>news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
>> My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>> on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>> that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>> holiday in Japan!
>>
>> Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
>> prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt that
>> he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate attempt to
>> defraud the railway and that he will be prosecuted. He took the
>> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>>
>> My son is very upset about it, really doesn't understand what he did
>> to annoy the inspector so much and mortified - never having been in
>> any kind of trouble before. I have absolutely no experience of such
>> things and do not know at all what to expect either.
>>
>> Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>> make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>> will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
>> a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
>> afford this.
>>
>> Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>>
>> Kath
>>
>>
>The inspector is not allowed to tell your son he will be prosecuted, merely 
>reported!!


I think his exact words were "put forward for prosecution"


>Was he cautioned?

yup

>Were notes made at the time?


yes, but only right at the end of the conversation, and only made on a
Q&A sheet provided by the inspector, he asked a written question and
wrote a 6-7 word summary of my response


>Was your son asked to sign the notes?


I was and did


>What Company does the inspector work for. 
>


Thameslink

Thanks for you're help,
 Martin (the son)

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:58:44 GMT, "Janice"  wrote:


>
>"4sub"  wrote in message
>news:ddt5cj$llc$1@newsm1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> "Phil"  wrote in message
>> news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
>> > My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>> > on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>> > that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>> > holiday in Japan!
>> >
>> > Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
>> > prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt that
>> > he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate attempt to
>> > defraud the railway and that he will be prosecuted. He took the
>> > railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>> >
>> > My son is very upset about it, really doesn't understand what he did
>> > to annoy the inspector so much and mortified - never having been in
>> > any kind of trouble before. I have absolutely no experience of such
>> > things and do not know at all what to expect either.
>> >
>> > Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>> > make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>> > will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
>> > a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
>> > afford this.
>> >
>> > Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>> >
>> > Kath
>> >
>> >
>> The inspector is not allowed to tell your son he will be prosecuted,
>merely
>> reported!!
>> Was he cautioned?
>> Were notes made at the time?
>> Was your son asked to sign the notes?
>> What Company does the inspector work for.
>>
>>
>
>what was the inspectors RPO number?
>


In too much of a daze to note it down I'm afraid. He was pretty unique
though...

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:47:57 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:


>On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:34:43 +0100, Phil  wrote:
>
>>My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>>on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>>that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>>holiday in Japan!
>>
>>Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>>make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>>will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive?
>
>From my limited understanding (not being a lawyer), he could only be
>convicted in court if it were proved beyond reasonable doubt that he
>deliberately avoided paying the correct fare. So I don't think you
>have too much to worry about. In fact the whole purpose of penalty
>fares is that they are a way of punishing people whom there's no point
>taking to court as they have no chance of proving this.
>
>>Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
>>prepared to pay the penalty fare
>
>This may have been what set the inspector off - they often assume that
>if you ask to pay the penalty fare, you must be trying to avoid a
>court appearance and therefore be a deliberate dodger.


Thanks for your help, but same point as others, my first response
wasnt to pay, merely to apologise and when someone told me the fair I
got my money out... I dont really know how i could have responded
better, it seems i was hung by my own friendliness!

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:22:50 +0100, "Martin Underwood" 
wrote:


>"asdf" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:g1c4g157k223cduekuedr8n0ili8i2bu8j@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:34:43 +0100, Phil  wrote:
>>
>>>My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>>>on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>>>that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>>>holiday in Japan!
>
>>>Although my son says he was apologetic, got his wallet out and was
>>>prepared to pay the penalty fare
>>
>> This may have been what set the inspector off - they often assume that
>> if you ask to pay the penalty fare, you must be trying to avoid a
>> court appearance and therefore be a deliberate dodger.
>
>So what are you supposed to do, so as *not* to "set the inspector off"? 
>Offering to pay the difference between the child fare and the adult fare - 
>plus a penalty fare if they *really* insist - would seem to be the sensible 
>reaction to learning that you've unwittingly claimed a discount that you 
>weren't entitled to. Arguing the toss, trying to offer futile excuses, or 
>being generally obnoxious, would seem to be the actions of someone who knows 
>he's guilty; offering to pay whatever is owed would seem to be the action of 
>someone who's made a genuine mistake.
>
>As a matter of interest, where did he buy the ticket - at a ticket office or 
>from a machine? Shouldn't a ticket office have asked to see the discount 
>card and checked that it was still valid? 
>


bought from a machine, and the inspector didnt seem to like that fact
one little bit...

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:29:51 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
 wrote:


>"Phil"  wrote in message
>news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
>
>> He took the
>> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>>
>Without commenting on other issues, removal of the card was, IMHO,
>reasonable - it had no further value to your son as it had expired, and in
>any event, from the terms and conditions of issue of the card:
>'3. The Railcard does not become your property and if requested must be
>handed in to a representative of any Train Company.'
>
>Peter
>


your quite right it is completely within their mandate to take it, and
it wasnt really the taking of it that i was complaining about, more
just that it leaves us with absolutely no record of anything.
the other thing that was in it was a ticket for the day before i left
for holiday which i think was also one of the triggers for the
inspector, I said I'd been away and he thought that I'd bought a
ticket while I'd "been away" - poor maths on his behalf, but
nonetheless no way to show that now if he decides to use a calculator
and shred it after...

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:50:24 +0000 (UTC), "Jonathan Morton"
 wrote:


>"DB."  wrote in message
>news:_crMe.15$K85.6@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
>> Martin Underwood asked:
>> >
>> > As a matter of interest, where did he buy the ticket - at a ticket
>> > office or from a machine?
>>
>> He bought it from a machine.
>> In her second paragraph the OP wrote:
>>
>> "the inspector said that he felt that he had purchased the ticket at a
>> machine in a deliberate attempt to defraud the railway".
>
>Eh? That just shows that the inspector felt that he had purchased the ticket
>from a machine - not that he did in fact do so.
>
>Regards
>
>Jonathan
>


I did buy it from the machine, sorry for the poor wording.

"Neil Sunderland"  wrote in message
news:vai4g1de1i84bs9a1e1984njb94u9p5ifk@4ax.com...

> allan tracy wrote:
> >I would suggest you also try posting this over on uk.legal.
>
> Don't be stupid.


news:uk.legal.moderated would be a much safer bet ... but expect a wait.
FWIW, from a legal pov it would appear to be utter bollocks (1), that is a
complete waste of court time and I have no doubt the magistrates will see it
and deal with it as such.

(1) Subject of course to the cravat of only hearing one side of the story

-- 

All the best,

Chris Wilson

That's cwilson at britwar with a dot uk and dot co on the end. (Reply
address is blackholed)

http://www.the-dormouse.org - The Dormouse Line Model Railway

> All that was given to my son was a small slip allowing him to travel
> home. The inspector has written TL139 on it - is that his number?


Yes that is his unique identifying number. Most Revenue people are 
unlikely to give anything more than their first name and number these 
days for obvious reasons.



> He was cautioned which scared him a bit ... not the sort of thing you
> expect to happen on a day out. Then he was asked to sign notes the
> inspector took after that point.


Normal procedure for Revenue to ask for notes to be signed as it saves 
problems later with persons saying 'it wasn't me and you can't prove it 
was'.



> And the ticket was purchased at a machine, he always uses a machine
> rather than queue, our station only has one ticket window and although
> small is quite busy (Flitwick). But the inspector thought he had used
> a machine to avoid showing his ticket.


It's always been double manned on weekday mornings before 11.00 when 
I've gone through and after 10.00 it never seems to have a queue of more 
than two or three people.


Just a thought........if your son was travelling with friends I've seen 
youths 'get lippy' when in a group which would result in an Inspector 
who sees faredodging daily reach straight for his notebook or proforma 
pad and bypass penalty fares. Not strictly the correct approach but 
understandable if you go to work every day knowing you are going to have 
problems with passengers without the correct or no ticket and most are 
'difficult' to deal with. Buying discounted tickets from a machine 
without the correct valid railcard is a very popular way of avoiding the 
correct fare for the journey and would lead to the Inspector immediately 
becoming suspicious.


Mark F

"Phil"  wrote in message 
news:eaj4g11j5u08rjrhj8bpcv4s85ttp3fig2@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:48:26 +0100, "4sub"  wrote:
>
>>
>>"Phil"  wrote in message
>>news:s854g19ro7h8na2hbl57d65lkl0oq41r8v@4ax.com...
>>> My son (aged 21 so not a child) has just been stopped by an inspector
>>> on a train. He had purchased a discounted ticket without realising
>>> that his Young Persons railcard expired 3 weeks ago while he was on
>>> holiday in Japan!
>>>
>>> Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
>>> prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt that
>>> he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate attempt to
>>> defraud the railway and that he will be prosecuted. He took the
>>> railcard away from him and said he would be contacted by post
>>>
>>> My son is very upset about it, really doesn't understand what he did
>>> to annoy the inspector so much and mortified - never having been in
>>> any kind of trouble before. I have absolutely no experience of such
>>> things and do not know at all what to expect either.
>>>
>>> Does anyone know what happens in such cases? Will there be a chance to
>>> make his excuses? Will there be some kind of smallish fixed penalty or
>>> will it have to be a court appearance and maybe very expensive? He is
>>> a student with nothing but an overdraft to his name and we cannot
>>> afford this.
>>>
>>> Any advice welcome as I am very worried,
>>>
>>> Kath
>>>
>>>
>>The inspector is not allowed to tell your son he will be prosecuted, 
>>merely
>>reported!!
>
> I think his exact words were "put forward for prosecution"
>
>>Was he cautioned?
>
> yup
>
>>Were notes made at the time?
>
> yes, but only right at the end of the conversation, and only made on a
> Q&A sheet provided by the inspector, he asked a written question and
> wrote a 6-7 word summary of my response
>
>>Was your son asked to sign the notes?
>
> I was and did
>
>>What Company does the inspector work for.
>>
>
> Thameslink
>
> Thanks for you're help,
> Martin (the son)
>
>

The dreaded MG11 pad
I thought they had scrapped them.
Always thought they were very sneaky.
Look like a penalty fare pad but ain't..........

> Eh? That just shows that the inspector felt that he had purchased the ticket
> from a machine - not that he did in fact do so.


I can recognise every ticket and identify which type of machine issued 
it and suspect Revenue Inspectors would be more able to do so than me.

Mark F

> The dreaded MG11 pad
> I thought they had scrapped them.
> Always thought they were very sneaky.
> Look like a penalty fare pad but ain't.......... 


There use seems to be spreading as Revenue don't get as much training as 
in BR days. Makes it easier for them not to 'cock up'.

Mark F

> >What Company does the inspector work for.

> Thameslink


What a surprise. (Not). I hear that the inspectors on Thameslink are
the worst on the network.
Wonder if it was 'our friend' Richard Crane.
A search on Google brings up this moron's work:
http://brainoff.com/statement.html
http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/archive/display.var.270848.0.fined_woman_slams_unbearable_trains.php

Chris Wilson wrote:

>(1) Subject of course to the cravat of only hearing one side of the story


<http://www.wesleymission.org.au/centres/creditline/sharkwatch0208.asp#12>

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

> What a surprise. (Not). I hear that the inspectors on Thameslink are
> the worst on the network.


................or the best if you have an opposing point of view. They 
seem to be extremely keen, dilligent and polite whenever I've 
encountered them but then I always have the correct documentation for my 
journey, YMMV if you haven't!



> Wonder if it was 'our friend' Richard Crane.
> A search on Google brings up this moron's work:


Seems to be doing what he was employed to do.

He's not a personal friend of mine and I have no recollection of whether 
he's checked my travel documentation in the past. Seems he's not one of 
your friends either. Has he caught you faredodging?

Mark F

"asdf" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:b8g4g1top7hb7jvd108u3o0fefd5v1gms3@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:22:50 +0100, "Martin Underwood" 
> wrote:
>
>>>>Although my son says he was apologetic, got his wallet out and was
>>>>prepared to pay the penalty fare
>>>
>>> This may have been what set the inspector off - they often assume that
>>> if you ask to pay the penalty fare, you must be trying to avoid a
>>> court appearance and therefore be a deliberate dodger.
>>
>>So what are you supposed to do, so as *not* to "set the inspector off"?
>
> From the stories I've heard, the best approach if you find yourself in
> this situation seems to be to stress to the inspector that you refuse
> to pay any sort of penalty fare, as you're not a criminal or fare
> dodger and it was only by accident that you found yourself without a
> valid ticket. (Pretend you don't know that penalty fares are *meant*
> for people who do so accidentally.) This approach seems to be the one
> most likely to lead to being hit with a penalty fare (which you then
> grudgingly pay) rather than a court appearance.
>
> It's unfortunate that the proper outcome seems to be best achieved
> through antagonism.


I was on a train that had just left Barnsley going towards Wakefield about 
ten years ago. I had a West Yorkshire Metro ticket which is valid for all 
stations within West Yorkshire and also had a single from Denby Dale to 
Darton which I'd bought at Huddersfield - I was travelling on the 
Huddersfield-Barnsley line to admire the scenery.

The ticket collector came round between Barnsley and Darton (while we were 
still in South Yorkshire) so I showed him the single. He said it was not 
valid. I asked him in what way. He wanted to know where I'd come from, where 
I was going and why. He insisted that I should have bought a single from the 
start of my journey (Huddersfield) to the end of my journey (Wakefield) and 
that "you can't mix and match tickets for different parts of the journey".

Fortunately I stuck to my guns because I know the rules: you can use a 
mixture of tickets providing the train stops at the stations which are the 
boundary of the jurisdiction of the different tickets. "Oh, what have we 
here? A smartarse?" he sneered.

He became very obnoxious and wanted to confiscate both the single and the 
Metro card, so I said "If you've got a problem, we'll sort it out at 
Wakefield, where I'll be happy to explain it to your supervisor and the 
police. But I'm keeping the tickets as evidence to support my explanation. 
If you think I'll try to run away, you can stay with me until then."

Because I was polite yet forceful, because I very conspicuously noted down 
his badge number and maybe because he realised I wasn't going to back down, 
he ambled off, muttering and metaphorically kicking the cat. I was 
sufficiently annoyed that I did track down someone in authority at Wakefield 
Westgate (I reasoned that Kirkgate would probably have a ticket office and 
nothing else, and I was going to Westgate anyway) and reported the incident, 
asking whether I was indeed in the right. "Of course you are!" barked the 
man I spoke to. "I've had problems with this guy before."

I can only hope the ticket collector got a good old bollocking. Accusing 
people of fraud when you don't know all the rules is a definite no-no in my 
book.

Before this thread descends into the usual bitchiness of most groups, can 
someone please explain how the following can be determind:

The signifigance of the ticketholder being in Japan 3 weeks ago?

Who said he annoyed the inspector?  (But clearly he did, attitude??)

"Oh Daddy I have been caught out."  That is how it translates.

21 year old turning on the drama, perhaps?

"In too much of a daze to note it down I'm afraid. He was pretty unique
though..."  Translates to throwing a tantrum.

Delibrately avoided paying the fare by going to a ticket machine and 
avioding having to produce the YP card at the booking office.  Ever heard of 
CCTV?

But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?  How 
do you identify between the genuine people who error and those who 
systematically rob fellow passengers.

Find a way to identify every fare dodger and you will be very rich.

You will probably get a written warning:-)

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:04:20 GMT, "C Smith"
 wrote:


>Find a way to identify every fare dodger and you will be very rich.


The idea of penalty fares is that, unless it is glaringly obvious (and
I think you'd have to have repeat offences to prove that, or something
like purchasing and using a pair of "short" seasons to get through
barriers that couldn't be anything but fraud), you don't *have* to.
No ticket = PF, regardless of explanation, no excuse.  Similar, IOW,
to parking tickets, and in itself a nice deterrent.

Travelling on an out of date railcard by accident is not obvious
fraud.  I have inadvertently done it myself, and as I posted
elsewhere, if you always have a YP card from 16 through to 2 days
before 27 you don't save any money by delaying renewal.

If PFs aren't going to be used in this manner, there is no point in
having them.  You may as well go back to charging SOS/SOR to those who
you don't believe are deliberately evading, and issuing a summons to
those who you believe are doing so.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Sunderland"  wrote in message
news:dbk4g1dbtf1ajf89ibijsn3s4u8ciinhq3@4ax.com...

> Chris Wilson wrote:
> >(1) Subject of course to the cravat of only hearing one side of the story
>
> <http://www.wesleymission.org.au/centres/creditline/sharkwatch0208.asp#12>


Not entirely sure how that follows from my post but ROTFLOL! What really
surprised me was that it was on a Wesleyan web site ... considering all
those years ago I was Christened Wesleyan ... oh how times have changed ...
still that's the antipodeans for you.

-- 

All the best,

Chris Wilson

That's cwilson at britwar with a dot uk and dot co on the end. (Reply
address is blackholed)

http://www.the-dormouse.org - The Dormouse Line Model Railway

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:36:11 GMT, mark  wrote:


>
>> All that was given to my son was a small slip allowing him to travel
>> home. The inspector has written TL139 on it - is that his number?
>
>Yes that is his unique identifying number. Most Revenue people are 
>unlikely to give anything more than their first name and number these 
>days for obvious reasons.
>
>
>> He was cautioned which scared him a bit ... not the sort of thing you
>> expect to happen on a day out. Then he was asked to sign notes the
>> inspector took after that point.
>
>Normal procedure for Revenue to ask for notes to be signed as it saves 
>problems later with persons saying 'it wasn't me and you can't prove it 
>was'.
>
>
>> And the ticket was purchased at a machine, he always uses a machine
>> rather than queue, our station only has one ticket window and although
>> small is quite busy (Flitwick). But the inspector thought he had used
>> a machine to avoid showing his ticket.
>
>It's always been double manned on weekday mornings before 11.00 when 
>I've gone through and after 10.00 it never seems to have a queue of more 
>than two or three people.
>
>
>Just a thought........if your son was travelling with friends I've seen 
>youths 'get lippy' when in a group which would result in an Inspector 
>who sees faredodging daily reach straight for his notebook or proforma 
>pad and bypass penalty fares. Not strictly the correct approach but 
>understandable if you go to work every day knowing you are going to have 
>problems with passengers without the correct or no ticket and most are 
>'difficult' to deal with. Buying discounted tickets from a machine 
>without the correct valid railcard is a very popular way of avoiding the 
>correct fare for the journey and would lead to the Inspector immediately 
>becoming suspicious.
>
>
>Mark F



I understand your suspicions but he was on his own and not usually
"difficult". I know .. I'm his mum and a bit biased but he has never
ever been in trouble in 21 years of his life

Jonathan Morton wrote:

> "DB."  wrote in message
> news:_crMe.15$K85.6@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
>> Martin Underwood asked:
>>>
>>> As a matter of interest, where did he buy the ticket - at a ticket
>>> office or from a machine?
>>
>> He bought it from a machine.
>> In her second paragraph the OP wrote:
>>
>> "the inspector said that he felt that he had purchased the ticket at
>> a machine in a deliberate attempt to defraud the railway".
>
> Eh? That just shows that the inspector felt that he had purchased the
> ticket from a machine - not that he did in fact do so.
>
> Regards
> Jonathan



    I read "the inspector felt..." as referring to "a deliberate attempt 
to defraud...", not as referring to whether the ticket had been 
purchased from a machine or ticket office.
    I'd assumed that the inspector would readily see that the ticket had 
been issued by a machine and not at a ticket office.  Surely there's an 
easily-recognisable difference?

-- 
DB.

Surely common sense has been over looked here - yes I agree a fault has
been committed, but very rightly the person in question has apologised
for his mistake and offered to pay the full fare for the journey there
and then. Would this not have been the best course of action for all,
and maybe the Penalty fare as well, and end of issue?

Also last Friday I saw 3 people on my train would had tickets that were
not valid on a Friday who tried to travel on them, in each case the
guard said sorry its not valid, and the people in question paid the
excess, end of problem. What is so different between these two cases
other than an RPI on a power trip?

Incidentally if you are stopped by Customs with more than your duty
free allowance, they have to allow you the option of paying the excise
duty due before confiscating goods and or prosecuting.

It seems to me that should this case get to court, as has been said
before the Judge will throw it out, if it ever reaches that far, which
I hope for you that it doesn't.

allan tracy wrote:

> I would suggest you also try posting this over on uk.legal.

..

    It was posted first on uk.legal, and I believe that it was my 
suggestion there that the OP should post it also on uk.railway that 
resulted in its appearance here.  Quite a good response, with 31 posts 
in the thread, and still counting!

-- 
DB.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:04:20 GMT, "C Smith"
 wrote:


>But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?  How 
>do you identify between the genuine people who error and those who 
>systematically rob fellow passengers.


You can't (of course), and that's the reason Penalty Fares were
introduced. If you don't have a valid ticket then you must pay the
Penalty Fare regardless of whether it was intentional or not. (Cases
where it can be *proven* that the fare was deliberatly avoided are
still taken to court as before.)

However in this case it appears there was no proof that the evasion
was deliberate, so (according to my limited understanding) a Penalty
Fare should have been issued.

Phil wrote:


> Thanks for your help, but same point as others, my first response
> wasnt to pay, merely to apologise and when someone told me the fair I
> got my money out... I dont really know how i could have responded
> better, it seems i was hung by my own friendliness!


The best way is usually to show good faith and intention to pay. If
you have a ticket that is nearly valid, as you did, then you have
shown good faith. (By nearly valid, I mean that you might be off-route
or, as in this case, on an expired railcard - not something silly like
a single London to West Hampstead and you're at Bedford...)

If you apologise, and as soon as the mistake is pointed out, offer to
pay whatever penalty fare or difference in fare is applicable, I agree
that there's not much more you can do, and it would take the most
obnoxious of conductors to want to take the matter further.

Unfortunately, you happened to meet him.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

On 16 Aug 2005 15:26:05 -0700, "Alex W"  wrote:


>Also last Friday I saw 3 people on my train would had tickets that were
>not valid on a Friday who tried to travel on them, in each case the
>guard said sorry its not valid, and the people in question paid the
>excess, end of problem. What is so different between these two cases
>other than an RPI on a power trip?


The difference is that this case took place within a Penalty Fares
area.

C Smith wrote:


> The signifigance of the ticketholder being in Japan 3 weeks ago?


When you go on holiday, you tend to lose track of key dates,
especially if they occur while you are away. Renewing a railcard is
exactly the sort of thing you are likely to overlook.
 

> 21 year old turning on the drama, perhaps?
> 
> "In too much of a daze to note it down I'm afraid. He was pretty 
> unique though..."  Translates to throwing a tantrum.


That's pretty harsh. Not all 21 year olds are thugs and hooligans -
there are plenty that have never been in trouble, least of all
threatened with prosecution for a crime that they didn't commit. If
that had been me at the same age, I think I might have been a bit
shaken by it all as well.
 

> Delibrately avoided paying the fare by going to a ticket machine and 
> avioding having to produce the YP card at the booking office.  Ever 
> heard of CCTV?


I've heard of CCTV - what about it?

There is no dispute that Martin bought his ticket from the machine -
he said he always does, as it is quicker than queueing up at the
ticket window. I usually do the same. It certainly doesn't indicate
that the deciding factor for him choosing machine over window was that
he could fraudulently buy a YP-discounted ticket without the need to
show a railcard.


> But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?  
> How do you identify between the genuine people who error and those 
> who systematically rob fellow passengers.


As I said, good faith and intention to pay. A railcard that has only
very recently expired, an otherwise valid ticket, and the immediate
offer of full payment, do not in any way strike me as someone who is
trying to dodge the fare.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:07:18 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:


>>Find a way to identify every fare dodger and you will be very rich.
>
>The idea of penalty fares is that, unless it is glaringly obvious (and
>I think you'd have to have repeat offences to prove that, or something
>like purchasing and using a pair of "short" seasons to get through
>barriers that couldn't be anything but fraud), you don't *have* to.
>No ticket = PF, regardless of explanation, no excuse.


I'm getting the feeling that perhaps ticket inspectors are being
trained not to issue the PF immediately, but to get pushy with the
suspect in the hope that he will slip up and either admit to
deliberate fraud, or make up a lie which can later be disproved and
used against him in court. The aim being to increase the number of
deliberate fraudsters who are prosecuted.

On 16 Aug 2005 22:58:17 GMT, Stevie D 
wrote:


>> But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?  
>> How do you identify between the genuine people who error and those 
>> who systematically rob fellow passengers.
>
>As I said, good faith and intention to pay. A railcard that has only
>very recently expired, an otherwise valid ticket, and the immediate
>offer of full payment, do not in any way strike me as someone who is
>trying to dodge the fare.


But I think the "problem" here is that in some penalty fares areas,
ticket checks are sufficiently infrequent that it would be cheaper to
never buy a ticket (or always "accidentally" buy the wrong ticket) and
just pay the PF whenever caught. So perhaps ticket inspectors
automatically get suspicious when someone is only too happy to pay the
PF. That doesn't excuse the treatment we have been hearing about here
though.

James wrote:


> What are the implications/consequences of
> refusing to sign the inspectors notes?


None what so ever. It helps the RPI if you sign the notes because then
everyone is agreed about what happened, but no inference is taken if
you don't want to sign the notes. It's the same with a police officer.

This sounds like it's going to get 'No Further Action' stuck on it, or
possibly a warning letter. If it does go to court, then I would imagine
that once you've explained to the magistrate that it was a genuine
mistake, that your son is of good character with no previous dealings
with the police (assuming that is the case), that he immediately
offered to pay the difference on discovering his error, that he is very
sorry, that he always pays his fares and that he will be extra careful
in future, then it would be a heavy-handed magistrate who would be
harsh on him.

Try not to worry too much about it. Wait for the letter and see what it
says. If it's not a warning and they do want to prosecute him then go
from there.


Matt Ashby

asdf wrote:

> On 16 Aug 2005 22:58:17 GMT, Stevie D 
> wrote:
>
> >> But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?
> >> How do you identify between the genuine people who error and those
> >> who systematically rob fellow passengers.
> >
> >As I said, good faith and intention to pay. A railcard that has only
> >very recently expired, an otherwise valid ticket, and the immediate
> >offer of full payment, do not in any way strike me as someone who is
> >trying to dodge the fare.
>
> But I think the "problem" here is that in some penalty fares areas,
> ticket checks are sufficiently infrequent that it would be cheaper to
> never buy a ticket (or always "accidentally" buy the wrong ticket) and
> just pay the PF whenever caught. So perhaps ticket inspectors
> automatically get suspicious when someone is only too happy to pay the
> PF. That doesn't excuse the treatment we have been hearing about here
> though.



The odd thing about this type of story is how inspectors now seem to be
avoiding issuing penalty fares and putting cases forward for
prosecution instead.  The real intention of penalty fares was to get
easy money from soft targets without the cost of prosecutions, and that
was certainly how they were used in the past.  In this story, they lost
that potential money, and the prosecution will probably be thrown out,
so why was it worth doing this?

I think the reason may be the low level of checks, such that occasional
penalty fares are worth risking and are no deterrent.  They have gone
for the option of low level of checks but brutal responses when anyone
is "caught".

This is actually more in line with natural justice than over-use of
penalty fares, because they have to state a case and prove it, but I
doubt if justice would ever be the motivation.

On 16 Aug 2005 15:26:05 -0700, "Alex W"  wrote:


>Surely common sense has been over looked here - yes I agree a fault has
>been committed, but very rightly the person in question has apologised
>for his mistake and offered to pay the full fare for the journey there
>and then. Would this not have been the best course of action for all,
>and maybe the Penalty fare as well, and end of issue?
>
>Also last Friday I saw 3 people on my train would had tickets that were
>not valid on a Friday who tried to travel on them, in each case the
>guard said sorry its not valid, and the people in question paid the
>excess, end of problem. What is so different between these two cases
>other than an RPI on a power trip?
>
>Incidentally if you are stopped by Customs with more than your duty
>free allowance, they have to allow you the option of paying the excise
>duty due before confiscating goods and or prosecuting.
>
>It seems to me that should this case get to court, as has been said
>before the Judge will throw it out, if it ever reaches that far, which
>I hope for you that it doesn't.


I think the main difference here is that I am a youth, and as such
naturally a trouble maker and petty theif.
It's not the usual format for the discrimination that students face,
but can simply serve as another example of the pigeonholing that most
people face day in and day out.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:04:20 GMT, "C Smith"
 wrote:


>Before this thread descends into the usual bitchiness of most groups, can 
>someone please explain how the following can be determind:
>
>The signifigance of the ticketholder being in Japan 3 weeks ago?
>


none whatsoever, excepting that it was this point in my conversation
with the conductor that he decided to prosecute.
He claimed that a ticket in my wallet proved i wasnt in japan and that
that somehow meant that i was lying about the dates, wheras the ticket
was actually bought the day before i went and his maths was simply
wrong.


>Who said he annoyed the inspector?  (But clearly he did, attitude??)
>


I said that i annoyed the inspector. I have nothing but a friendly
attitude, am well spoken and did my utmost to be friendly, it was as i
was holding a pleasant conversation with, and giving money to his
partner that the leading inspector decided that rather than fine me he
would put me forward for prosecution.


>"Oh Daddy I have been caught out."  That is how it translates.


I resent that comment. I fully intend to pay all of the fine that I am
able to do so, in exactly the same way as i pay for every other aspect
of my life.
Just because it was my mother who decided to ask for advice in this
newsgroup it gives you absolutely no right to assume anything about
me.


>
>21 year old turning on the drama, perhaps?


I think that yes i am probably turning on the drama. I have never been
threatened with prosecution before, and as such was a little
intimidated by the maximum and average fines described and turned to
my parents for moral support and guidance. This is what you do when
your not very wise in the ways of the world and are trying to learn.


>
>"In too much of a daze to note it down I'm afraid. He was pretty unique
>though..."  Translates to throwing a tantrum.


No, translates to scared and confused, it all happened very quickly.
He was unique in appearance, and accent.


>
>Delibrately avoided paying the fare by going to a ticket machine and 
>avioding having to produce the YP card at the booking office.  Ever heard of 
>CCTV?


I dont know if that's aimed at me, but i certainly was never asked to
show my pass to any CCTV cameras???


>
>But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?  How 
>do you identify between the genuine people who error and those who 
>systematically rob fellow passengers.
>
>Find a way to identify every fare dodger and you will be very rich.
>
>You will probably get a written warning:-)
>
>


I realise this post was not intended to be a personal attack, but you
certainly came close to making one, whilst adding nothing at all to
the discussion. The rest of the group has been very helpful, but it
only takes one.
If you have any further opinions of me I would be glad to hear them,
but I would suggest you email them me and stop wasting everyone else's
time.
Regards,
 Martin Stennett
  martin@martinsphotos.net

If you are cautioned by the police, when they ask 'do you understand?' you 
can reply ' I don't understand the meaning of the words and would like to 
exercise my right to refer to the legislation concerned'

The police then have to produce a copy of PACE, which you can take all day 
reading (even if you are sat at the side of the road) and the Police cannot 
do anything till you have understood the caution.

Does this work with Revenue Protection Inspectors?

>>> But seriously how many fare dodgers do you think the inspectors catch?
>>> How do you identify between the genuine people who error and those
>>> who systematically rob fellow passengers.
>>
>>As I said, good faith and intention to pay. A railcard that has only
>>very recently expired, an otherwise valid ticket, and the immediate
>>offer of full payment, do not in any way strike me as someone who is
>>trying to dodge the fare.
>
> But I think the "problem" here is that in some penalty fares areas,
> ticket checks are sufficiently infrequent that it would be cheaper to
> never buy a ticket (or always "accidentally" buy the wrong ticket) and
> just pay the PF whenever caught. So perhaps ticket inspectors
> automatically get suspicious when someone is only too happy to pay the
> PF. That doesn't excuse the treatment we have been hearing about here
> though.


When I used to travel between Stratford and Camden Rd every day I only used 
to see RPI's about once a month at Camden. When they did turn up there would 
be at least 10-15 peple forming an ordely queue clutching a 10 note.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:36:11 GMT someone who may be mark
 wrote this:-


>Yes that is his unique identifying number. Most Revenue people are 
>unlikely to give anything more than their first name and number these 
>days for obvious reasons.


It is an interesting example of the arrogance of some people that
they expect/demand someone else to give them their full name and
home address, but will not even provide their full name themselves.

Who knows what the arrogant person is going to do with the
information? For obvious reasons passengers should be careful about
giving such information.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 23:52:17 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:


>The difference is that this case took place within a Penalty Fares
>area.


The only difference that should have made is that the "XS" due is a
penalty fare. 

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:15:06 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:


> So perhaps ticket inspectors
>automatically get suspicious when someone is only too happy to pay the
>PF. That doesn't excuse the treatment we have been hearing about here
>though.


It means two things if that occurs.
1. The PF is too low and needs to be increased; or
2. There are not enough inspections.  (PFs are often used as an excuse
to cut inspection staff.  That's not what they're for.)

If you implement them in the right way, PFs should be able to result
in a zero net loss to the TOC from fare evasion, certainly on
short-distance services.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:05:20 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:


>I'm getting the feeling that perhaps ticket inspectors are being
>trained not to issue the PF immediately, but to get pushy with the
>suspect in the hope that he will slip up and either admit to
>deliberate fraud, or make up a lie which can later be disproved and
>used against him in court. The aim being to increase the number of
>deliberate fraudsters who are prosecuted.


Perhaps so, but it is an inappropriate method of operation.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 01:58:04 +0100, Phil  wrote:


>I said that i annoyed the inspector. I have nothing but a friendly
>attitude, am well spoken and did my utmost to be friendly, it was as i
>was holding a pleasant conversation with, and giving money to his
>partner that the leading inspector decided that rather than fine me he
>would put me forward for prosecution.


It is a known and useful fact that the best way to annoy someone who
is being aggressive and/or rude, especially on the telephone, is to be
sickeningly polite back to them.  I understand (from my Mum who is a
manager in one) that this is how they train call centre people to deal
with angry callers.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

C Smith wrote:

> Delibrately avoided paying the fare by going to a ticket machine and
> avioding having to produce the YP card at the booking office.  Ever heard of
> CCTV?


So by this logic, no-one should ever use a ticket machine.

In message , at 
01:30:26 on Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Yorkie  remarked:

>> Delibrately avoided paying the fare by going to a ticket machine and
>> avioding having to produce the YP card at the booking office.  Ever heard of
>> CCTV?
>
>So by this logic, no-one should ever use a ticket machine.


Or even believe a ticket machine. I am constantly told lies by the 
FastTicket machine where I pick up my web-ordered tickets.

It either tells me that the ticket I'm picking up needs an accompanying 
railcard (when it doesn't), or that the ticket is valid for 30 days 
(rather than the two specified trains that day).

-- 
Roland Perry

mark wrote:

> > What a surprise. (Not). I hear that the inspectors on Thameslink are
> > the worst on the network.

> ...............or the best if you have an opposing point of view. They
> seem to be extremely keen, dilligent and polite whenever I've
> encountered them but then I always have the correct documentation for my
> journey, YMMV if you haven't!
<snip>
> He's not a personal friend of mine and I have no recollection of whether
> he's checked my travel documentation in the past. Seems he's not one of
> your friends either. Has he caught you faredodging?


I have only travelled on Thameslink twice for a journey of under 10
miles and never had my tickets checked.
I only say what I did because I have heard from places online, and this
very newsgroup about the poor quality of TL inspectors.

> It means two things if that occurs.
> 1. The PF is too low and needs to be increased; or
> 2. There are not enough inspections.  (PFs are often used as an excuse
> to cut inspection staff.  That's not what they're for.)
> If you implement them in the right way, PFs should be able to result
> in a zero net loss to the TOC from fare evasion, certainly on
> short-distance services.


Well, the DfT website says:
The specific objectives in updating the regulation are to ensure that
the penalty fare:
    * acts as a deterrent to fare evasion;
    * continues to allow train operators an effective mechanism to use
as part of
      their revenue protection strategy;
    * is fair, reasonable and enforceable.

But that got me thinking, if they really want to deter fare evasion,
then the posters really should write up the true maximum sentence,
which is, IIRC £1000 fine/2mths in prison.

On 17 Aug 2005 03:50:50 -0700, Joe Patrick wrote in
, seen in
uk.railway:

> mark wrote:
> > > What a surprise. (Not). I hear that the inspectors on Thameslink are
> > > the worst on the network.
> 
> > ...............or the best if you have an opposing point of view. They
> > seem to be extremely keen, dilligent and polite whenever I've
> > encountered them but then I always have the correct documentation for my
> > journey, YMMV if you haven't!
> <snip>
> > He's not a personal friend of mine and I have no recollection of whether
> > he's checked my travel documentation in the past. Seems he's not one of
> > your friends either. Has he caught you faredodging?
> 
> I have only travelled on Thameslink twice for a journey of under 10
> miles and never had my tickets checked.
> I only say what I did because I have heard from places online, and this
> very newsgroup about the poor quality of TL inspectors.


So you feel free to name an individual, call him a moron and be
generally abusive about his and his colleagues abilities despite never
having any experience whatsoever of that person or his colleagues?

Are you always a complete arsehole, or is it only when you're hiding
behind a computer?

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On 16 Aug 2005 15:26:05 -0700, Alex W wrote in
, seen in
uk.railway:

[...] 

> Also last Friday I saw 3 people on my train would had tickets that were
> not valid on a Friday who tried to travel on them, in each case the
> guard said sorry its not valid, and the people in question paid the
> excess, end of problem. What is so different between these two cases
> other than an RPI on a power trip?


The immediate difference is that guards are normally tasked to take
money for the company. RPIs are tasked to detect fraud. 

That leads to a big difference in general approach.


The second difference is that the railway has always treated travel on
a discount ticket (i.e. one with a %age discount) with an invalid or
non-existent discount ID as being distinctly more serious than
'merely' travelling on the wrong train. 

So, travel on a peak train with a Saver, you'll "just" get excessed. 
Travel on that train with a railcard discounted ticket but without a
valid railcard and at best you get to buy a new ticket (the old one
being endorsed "No Railcard Held") [at least that was always the case
when I was a guard despite the number of guards who took the easy way
out by excessing such tickets up to full adult fare].

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

Neil Williams wrote on Tue, 16 Aug 2005

>On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:04:20 GMT, "C Smith"
> wrote:
>
>>Find a way to identify every fare dodger and you will be very rich.
>
>The idea of penalty fares is that, unless it is glaringly obvious (and
>I think you'd have to have repeat offences to prove that, or something
>like purchasing and using a pair of "short" seasons to get through
>barriers that couldn't be anything but fraud), you don't *have* to.
>No ticket = PF, regardless of explanation, no excuse.  Similar, IOW,
>to parking tickets, and in itself a nice deterrent.


A month ago, a letter arrived at home addressed to some unknown person 
who has never AFAIAA lived in the place.  It was from Thameslink 
Prosecutions Department, and said:

  "A person giving the above mentioned name and address was questioned by
   a member of railway staff on Thursday 19th May 2005 en route near
   MITCHAM JUNCTION station.  Before I proceed with the investigation of
   this matter, I afford you the opportunity of responding and giving
   your explanation concerning this incident."
   .....
  "PLEASE DO NOT SEND ANY MONEY WITH YOUR REPLY."

The person named isn't and hasn't been on the electoral register,
and shouldn't have had any evidence of living at this address.  So I 
e-mailed Thameslink to ask what evidence of address had been proffered.
The reply contained:

  "It doesn't always transpire that someone has shown evidence of their
   address. As far as the law is concerned, my inspectors are obliged to
   accept details given unless they can prove, at the time, that the
   details are false. This is often very difficult to do."

I've seen RPIs on the phone when questioning people, and assumed that
they were doing ID and address checks.  But from this correspondence,
I get the impression that with a bit of nerve and front, you can stand
a good chance of getting away without paying even a penalty fare.  And
at what risk, with the Transport Police being so thin on the ground?
-- 
Iain Archer            To email, please use Reply-To address

"Capture Boy"  wrote in message 
news:dduhk8$rfh$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...

> If you are cautioned by the police, when they ask 'do you understand?' you 
> can reply ' I don't understand the meaning of the words and would like to 
> exercise my right to refer to the legislation concerned'
>
> The police then have to produce a copy of PACE, which you can take all day 
> reading (even if you are sat at the side of the road) and the Police 
> cannot do anything till you have understood the caution.
>
> Does this work with Revenue Protection Inspectors?
>
>
>

It applies to everyone working within PACE
The person may be 'a person at risk' and the interview would need to be held 
under stricter guidelines..

My heart feels that the RPO/RPI was right in this case though.

4sub wrote:

> My heart feels that the RPO/RPI was right in this case though.


But unless it can be PROVEN he was avoiding paying the fare then it is
not "right". He offered to pay the penalty, what else is a penalty fare
for?

I once had 3 people on the same train as me have out of date railcards,
on a Virgin CrossCountry service. The conductor said that it was quite
common and even some ticket staff fail to notice that the railcards are
out of date! All were given a choice of an SOS to the next stop, alight
and buy railcard or an SOS to final destination.

Why is there such a difference in policy on Virgin and Thameslink?

This has put me off using Thameslink in case my railcard is ever lost
or stolen.

"Yorkie"  wrote in message 
news:1124292891.829442.237850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> 4sub wrote:
>> My heart feels that the RPO/RPI was right in this case though.
>
> But unless it can be PROVEN he was avoiding paying the fare then it is
> not "right". He offered to pay the penalty, what else is a penalty fare
> for?
>
> I once had 3 people on the same train as me have out of date railcards,
> on a Virgin CrossCountry service. The conductor said that it was quite
> common and even some ticket staff fail to notice that the railcards are
> out of date! All were given a choice of an SOS to the next stop, alight
> and buy railcard or an SOS to final destination.
>
> Why is there such a difference in policy on Virgin and Thameslink?
>
> This has put me off using Thameslink in case my railcard is ever lost
> or stolen.
>>
>
>

Well only time will tell.
If it was my son I would be talking to my solicitor.

"Yorkie"  wrote in message 
news:1124292891.829442.237850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<SNIP>

>
> Why is there such a difference in policy on Virgin and Thameslink?
>
> This has put me off using Thameslink in case my railcard is ever lost
> or stolen.
>


I was on a Manchester Piccadilly - Birmingham Voyager this morning. The 
"gripper" was soon in action and a young lady sat near to me stated she was 
going to Stafford but had no money. Rather than have a long discussion, he 
ordered her to visit the Booking Office at Stockport to obtain a valid 
ticket by any means open to her. Last I saw of her was heading down the 
stairs at Stockport.

KW.

Ken Ward wrote:

> "Yorkie"  wrote in message
> news:1124292891.829442.237850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> <SNIP>
>>
>> Why is there such a difference in policy on Virgin and Thameslink?
>>
>> This has put me off using Thameslink in case my railcard is ever lost
>> or stolen.
>>
>
> I was on a Manchester Piccadilly - Birmingham Voyager this morning.
> The "gripper" was soon in action and a young lady sat near to me
> stated she was going to Stafford but had no money. Rather than have a
> long discussion, he ordered her to visit the Booking Office at
> Stockport to obtain a valid ticket by any means open to her. Last I
> saw of her was heading down the stairs at Stockport.
>


An excellent example of how to get a free ride from Manchester to Stockport.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:58:47 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
 wrote this:-


>My heart feels that the RPO/RPI was right in this case though. 


Your belief in the mind-reading abilities of this bod is amusing,
but not very useful.

An intuition that someone used a ticket machine to avoid their
railcard being examined by a human might just hold water in some
parts of England. However, in SE England I very rarely use a ticket
office, as the queues are too long. The same is true at Edinburgh
Waverley BTW.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"David Hansen"  wrote in message 
news:giq6g1l2aosso8abk53avre83hdqb8kki1@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:58:47 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
>  wrote this:-
>
>>My heart feels that the RPO/RPI was right in this case though.
>
> Your belief in the mind-reading abilities of this bod is amusing,
> but not very useful.
>
> An intuition that someone used a ticket machine to avoid their
> railcard being examined by a human might just hold water in some
> parts of England. However, in SE England I very rarely use a ticket
> office, as the queues are too long. The same is true at Edinburgh
> Waverley BTW.
>
>
> -- 
> David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
> I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
> prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


Well a conversation ended after
A chat
A caution
An MG11 issued
What mind reading. :)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 07:19:36 +0100, David Hansen wrote:


> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:36:11 GMT someone who may be mark
>  wrote this:-
> 
>>Yes that is his unique identifying number. Most Revenue people are 
>>unlikely to give anything more than their first name and number these 
>>days for obvious reasons.
> 
> It is an interesting example of the arrogance of some people that
> they expect/demand someone else to give them their full name and
> home address, but will not even provide their full name themselves.
> 
> Who knows what the arrogant person is going to do with the
> information? For obvious reasons passengers should be careful about
> giving such information.


Does a inspector have the right to demand your name and address? If anyone
other than a police officer asks for it I just refuse point blank.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:52:53 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
 wrote this:-


>What mind reading. :) 


The mind reading behind the assertion that the passenger had used a
ticket machine, rather than a ticket office, to avoid his railcard
being examined by a human.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"David Hansen"  wrote in message 
news:mvv6g1l011on5m3njiqm67mm5hpkg5bi76@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:52:53 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
>  wrote this:-
>
>>What mind reading. :)
>
> The mind reading behind the assertion that the passenger had used a
> ticket machine, rather than a ticket office, to avoid his railcard
> being examined by a human.
>
>
> -- 
> David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
> I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
> prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.
>
>

I sorry David. I thought in the original post he mentioned a ticket machine.

>

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:33:19 +0100 someone who may be Chris Street
 wrote this:-


>Does a inspector have the right to demand your name and address? If anyone
>other than a police officer asks for it I just refuse point blank.


When the last police officer asked me for my name and address I
asked him on what grounds he was asking for them. Despite several of
his colleagues congregating round me in a somewhat threatening
manner I continued to ask the same question. They could not give me
a convincing answer. This happened three times in the space of a
week, due to so-called security measures during the slimeball
conference in Gleneagles, where the police were picking on people
based entirely on their mode of transport rather than the likely
threat they posed. They were simply trying to bullshit me and
no-doubt if I had given them this information they would have put it
on God knows how many databases, the police not being bothered by
things like the Data Protection Act.

The police are their own worst enemies. If they want a better
reputation then the solution is entirely in their hands. I suspect
they don't want a better reputation, though there are other
explanations.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 19:28:56 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
 wrote this:-


>I sorry David. I thought in the original post he mentioned a ticket machine.


He did and it is the mind reading of the railway official. From the
original post:

=====================================================================
Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt
that he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate
attempt to defraud the railway
=====================================================================

A perfect example of someone that thinks they are a mind reader.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"David Hansen"  wrote in message 
news:ge87g150phksqe9odpa0nk2lg07rk7jk89@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 19:28:56 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
>  wrote this:-
>
>>I sorry David. I thought in the original post he mentioned a ticket 
>>machine.
>
> He did and it is the mind reading of the railway official. From the
> original post:
>
> =====================================================================
> Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
> prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt
> that he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate
> attempt to defraud the railway
> =====================================================================
>
> A perfect example of someone that thinks they are a mind reader.
>
>
> -- 
> David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
> I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
> prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.
>
>

With you now.
My worry is, if it was my son, is this now looks like a 'knock-off'.

Phil wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:04:20 GMT, "C Smith"
>  wrote:
>> Who said he annoyed the inspector?  (But clearly he did,
>> attitude??)
>
> I said that i annoyed the inspector. I have nothing but a friendly
> attitude, am well spoken and did my utmost to be friendly, it was
> as i was holding a pleasant conversation with, and giving money to
> his partner that the leading inspector decided that rather than
> fine me he would put me forward for prosecution.


You were "giving money to" another RPI?  Was that the penalty fare?  Did
you actually hand the money over before his boss decided to take a
harsher line?

This raises some interesting issues.  If an RPI employed by the TOC
decides to impose a penalty fare and you give (or perhaps nearly give)
him the money, at what point in this tranaction is the TOC committed to
that course of action?  After asking for the penalty fare or after
receiving it or giving a receipt or what?
-- 
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Well I think Penalty Fares are immoral anyway: "so you're a bit late
and didn't have time to buy a ticket at the station? Right! You're
going to give us GBP20 of your money! Never mind that we've slapped a
minimum fare on the Network Card, and our bus division has put fares up
way above inflation.... We're going to do it anyway!"

.... but I think the action of this inspector is beyond belief. I hope
that he is instantly dismissed and barred from working in a public
facing job again. Why on earth do they hire people like that? People
that are so narrow-minded that they think the entire public is out to
deliberately get away without paying?

Nick

Then the inspector is the sort of narrow-minded idiot who automatically
assumes everyone's out to travel on trains without paying. Why on earth
do railways employ people like that? People with no customer care
skills whatsoever. People that never give other people the benefit of
the doubt. People like that should never be employed in a customer
facing capacity. I hope this idiot is given the boot asap and barred
from customer-facing roles for good.

That and the guy who got threatened at Lockerbie the other week. It
makes you sick.

Nick

>From the stories I've heard, the best approach if you find yourself in
>this situation seems to be to stress to the inspector that you refuse
>to pay any sort of penalty fare, as you're not a criminal or fare
>dodger and it was only by accident that you found yourself without a
>valid ticket. (Pretend you don't know that penalty fares are *meant*
>for people who do so accidentally.) This approach seems to be the one
>most likely to lead to being hit with a penalty fare (which you then
>grudgingly pay) rather than a court appearance.


What I don't understand is why do the railway companies hire people
with this extraordinarily narrow-minded attitude towards customers?
Surely the thing to do is to give people the benefit of the doubt?

Incidentally is it railway company policy to be as narrow minded as
possible or is it just a few  individuals?

Interesting that if you're rich and famous and someone makes untrue
allegations about you, you can claim slander.... One rule for one, one
rule for another :-(

Nick

> With you now.
> My worry is, if it was my son, is this now looks like a 'knock-off'



I would have taken the same line as the RPI and reported him.


Mark F

>I would have taken the same line as the RPI and reported him.


Why? 

Nick

> Then the inspector is the sort of narrow-minded idiot who automatically
 > assumes everyone's out to travel on trains without paying. Why on earth
 > do railways employ people like that? People with no customer care
 > skills whatsoever. People that never give other people the benefit of
 > the doubt. People like that should never be employed in a customer
 > facing capacity. I hope this idiot is given the boot asap and barred
 > from customer-facing roles for good.

If there is a terrorist incident/bomb scare or problem where a passenger 
is being assaulted [don't expect BTP to appear as they are too thin on 
the ground] then the only mobile staff are the Revenue staff who deal 
with difficult situations daily and will come to the aid of prats like 
you and Joe Patrick even if it means risking their own personal safety.

Mark F

>If there is a terrorist incident/bomb scare or problem where a passenger
>is being assaulted


I wasn't talking about that; I was talking about this case where
someone was travelling without realising they did not have a valid
railcard. Nothing to do with terrorist incidents whatsoever. The
correct thing for the inspector to have done is to treat the guy with
respect, and ask for the difference between the YP fare and full fare.
Fair, respectful, gentlemanly and polite. What should be expected of
the railways.

Nick

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 21:44:29 GMT, mark  wrote:


>If there is a terrorist incident/bomb scare or problem where a passenger 
>is being assaulted [don't expect BTP to appear as they are too thin on 
>the ground] then the only mobile staff are the Revenue staff who deal 
>with difficult situations daily and will come to the aid of prats like 
>you and Joe Patrick even if it means risking their own personal safety.


How does that have any bearing on their "right" to treat people who
may have made a genuine mistake in the fashion that they often do?

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

> I have only travelled on Thameslink twice for a journey of under 10
> miles and never had my tickets checked.
> I only say what I did because I have heard from places online, and this
> very newsgroup about the poor quality of TL inspectors.


Twenty miles of travel qualifies you to judge a Revenue departments 
performance then?..............and you seem to believe most of the crap 
that is written by people with no experience of dealing with faredodgers 
on a daily basis.

Time for you to leave your PC desk and get out and about and get a life 
methinks. I don't think you should consider applying for a Revenue post 
on the railway as you definitely would not cope with the reality judging 
by your posts to this group.


Mark F

nick150971@yahoo.co.uk wrote:


> Well I think Penalty Fares are immoral anyway: "so you're a bit late
> and didn't have time to buy a ticket at the station? Right! You're
> going to give us GBP20 of your money! Never mind that we've slapped a
> minimum fare on the Network Card, and our bus division has put fares 
> up way above inflation.... We're going to do it anyway!"


You may think it's immoral for the railways to have the temerity to
charge people for gracing them with their presence [1]. If all
passengers bought tickets for every journey they made, the railways
would not have had to impose Penalty Fares.

By and large, PFZs are only in place in areas that have fairly
frequent services, so even if you do miss the train you intended to
catch, you won't have long to wait for the next one.

You know that you need to allow time to buy a ticket at the station,
but you nevertheless turn up at the last minute and expect to be waved
through and allowed to buy a ticket at the other end. What proportion
of people who travel without a ticket do you think buy one when they
reach their destination? It is so rare that a lot of ticket clerks
don't understand what you mean when you ask to buy a ticket to the
station you are standing at.

A Penalty Fare is no different to someone not being allowed to buy a
railcard-discounted Saver on board a train, and having to pay a full
fare Standard Open instead. If you want to travel by rail, you play by
the railway's rules. One of those rules is that you must have a valid
ticket, and in most cases, it will be cheaper to buy it before you get
on the train.


[1] cf Oriental woman on "The Tube" this week who saw absolutely
nothing wrong with buying a 4.40 ticket from a tout for 1, and
couldn't believe the inspector was being so unreasonable as to tell
her to buy a valid ticket...

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

> What I don't understand is why do the railway companies hire people
> with this extraordinarily narrow-minded attitude towards customers?
> Surely the thing to do is to give people the benefit of the doubt?


If a valid ticket is not held for the complete journey with a valid 
supporting railcard/documentation then the passenger is not a customer.



> Incidentally is it railway company policy to be as narrow minded as
> possible or is it just a few  individuals?



Are you not being just as narrow minded if you have no experience of the 
job?



> Interesting that if you're rich and famous and someone makes untrue
> allegations about you, you can claim slander.... One rule for one, one
> rule for another


Got to agree with you here as I'm unlikely to become rich or famous 
while I'm spending time defending Revenue [not my department] on 
newsgroups!   :-)

Mark F

nick150971@yahoo.co.uk wrote:


> What I don't understand is why do the railway companies hire people
> with this extraordinarily narrow-minded attitude towards customers?
> Surely the thing to do is to give people the benefit of the doubt?


(i) Because if you give people the benefit of the doubt all the time,
there is very little point in having RPIs or ticket collectors at all.
Yes, there are _some_ occasions when it is appropriate to give
passengers the benefit of the doubt, but plenty more where it is not.
The reason these people are employed is to collect fares.

(ii) Because it can be difficult to recruit people to that sort of
job, so the railways don't always have hundreds of well-qualified
applicants to choose from - often, they will be so desperate that they
will take anyone who knows roughly what a ticket looks like.

(iii) Because some TOCs contract out some of their revenue protection
duties to external agencies, and so have little say over the calibre
of employees.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

>>I would have taken the same line as the RPI and reported him.
> 
> 
> Why? 
> 
> Nick
> 


Having used a ticket machine to purchase a ticket and being in 
possession of an out of date Railcard is a VERY popular way of 
attempting to avoid paying the correct fare for a journey as is 
falsifying 'boxes' by protected staff [I did not single out the public 
as an RPI, staff have to obey the rules as well] who expect to escape 
any punishment by claiming innocence.

Mark F

>i) Because if you give people the benefit of the doubt all the time,
>there is very little point in having RPIs or ticket collectors at all.
>Yes, there are _some_ occasions when it is appropriate to give
>passengers the benefit of the doubt, but plenty more where it is not.
>The reason these people are employed is to collect fares.


OK... he should do his job and collect the correct fare, the one
without the railcard :-)
Re (ii) and (iii), IMX most people in the human race try to see the
best in others, so it shouldn't be difficult :-)

Nick

Maybe it is, but unless you can prove it....

Nick

> Maybe it is, but unless you can prove it....




Which is why suitable training is required. Questioning techniques can 
garner suficient information from the 'sharpest' passengers if applied 
correctly to enable a report to be submitted.

Mark F

"mark"  wrote in message 
news:GyOMe.12550$Mf6.3748@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...

> Having used a ticket machine to purchase a ticket and being in possession 
> of an out of date Railcard is a VERY popular way of attempting to avoid 
> paying the correct fare for a journey as is falsifying 'boxes' by 
> protected staff [I did not single out the public as an RPI, staff have to 
> obey the rules as well] who expect to escape any punishment by claiming 
> innocence.


Surely it depends on the circumstances though. If the passenger has a wallet 
full of old tickets which would have been valid when used, and the railcard 
is only just out of date, surely there is a case for discretion?

>Are you not being just as narrow minded if you have no experience of the
>job?


All I can say is that most people I know would not set out to evade
paying fares on the railway. Unless I associate with unusual people I
think  that could probably be translated to the public at large.

Why not put yourself in this unfortunate 21 year old's shoes? Think of
*his* trauma... being sent to court for an honest mistake.

Nick

"David Splett"  wrote in message
news:de0feo$ub7$1@newsm1.svr.pol.co.uk...

> "mark"  wrote in message
> news:GyOMe.12550$Mf6.3748@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
> > Having used a ticket machine to purchase a ticket and being in
possession
> > of an out of date Railcard is a VERY popular way of attempting to avoid
> > paying the correct fare for a journey as is falsifying 'boxes' by
> > protected staff [I did not single out the public as an RPI, staff have
to
> > obey the rules as well] who expect to escape any punishment by claiming
> > innocence.
>
> Surely it depends on the circumstances though. If the passenger has a
wallet
> full of old tickets which would have been valid when used, and the
railcard
> is only just out of date, surely there is a case for discretion?
>

I cannot see how, in the circumstances described in this thread, that the
RPI can *prove* *intent* to avoid the proper fare, so I cannot see how a
prosecution could succeed, so it is a waste of his time pursuing this
course.Though he might have realised this but decided to scare the son of
the OP so that he is more careful about expiry dates in future. IMHO he
would have been correct if he had issued a PF (if it was a PF area), or sold
an open single, without allowing value for the incorrect ticket. He was also
correct to withdraw the (expired) railcard.

Peter

"David Hansen"  wrote in message 
news:giq6g1l2aosso8abk53avre83hdqb8kki1@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:58:47 +0100 someone who may be "4sub"
>  wrote this:-
>
>>My heart feels that the RPO/RPI was right in this case though.
>
> Your belief in the mind-reading abilities of this bod is amusing,
> but not very useful.
>
> An intuition that someone used a ticket machine to avoid their
> railcard being examined by a human might just hold water in some
> parts of England. However, in SE England I very rarely use a ticket
> office, as the queues are too long. The same is true at Edinburgh
> Waverley BTW.


Today was the first time I have ever used a Fast ticket? machine. I bought a 
GM Day Ranger price 2:70.
The ticket produced was the first one I have had with "square cut" corners. 
All others I have had from the Ticket Office window have had rounded 
corners. Is this the way to tell if a ticket came from a machine?

KW

"Peter Masson"  wrote in message 
news:de0hd3$855$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

>
> "David Splett"  wrote in message
> news:de0feo$ub7$1@newsm1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> "mark"  wrote in message
>> news:GyOMe.12550$Mf6.3748@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
> IMHO he
> would have been correct if he had issued a PF (if it was a PF area), or 
> sold
> an open single, without allowing value for the incorrect ticket. He was 
> also
> correct to withdraw the (expired) railcard.


Gosh. Is it normal practice to charge the full price for an adult single, 
rather than charging the difference between the child and the adult fares? 
So you actually end up paying for two tickets - plus another single to come 
back when a return may have been cheaper than two singles. What about 
selling a single to the next station to allow the person to buy a new 
railcard so his existing ticket becomes valid once again - is that 
permissible?

I reckon that the incident, and its retelling and debating in this 
newsgroup, will have done untold harm to the reputation of the relevant TOC 
for being vindictive and draconian. There's a world of difference between 
(on the one hand) using a slightly out-of-date railcard or forgetting to 
bring your railcard with you, and (on the other hand) not having a railcard 
at all. The former is a fairly venial sin and should be treated as such; the 
latter should be punished severely.

I'd say that the RPI should have used his common sense and discretion. If I 
was his employer, he'd be looking for another job without benefit of a 
reference if he couldn't apply humanity to his job - in the same way as any 
RPI/guard who turfs a vulnerable child off a train and leaves them to find 
their own way home should lose his job. One incident of bad publicity 
outweighs all the extra revenue from fare dodgers.

Martin Underwood  wrote:


>  not having a railcard 
> at all. The former is a fairly venial sin and should be treated as such; the
> latter should be punished severely.



Hello,

Just to be curious, what happens in the UK when a Railcard legitime
owner buys a discounted ticket but for any reason forgets his Railcard
aand cannot show it on the train?

FYI in France, and assuming the uncaring passegner has a valid ID and
some money or credit card to pay on the train, the procedure is:

- the guard issues a form (which is both an official statement and a
train ticket)
- the passenger pays the difference between the discounted fare and the
full fare single
- the original ticket is "personnalised" and stamped by the guard
- and the passenger sends it to Customer service. He will be refunded
the amount payed on the train, minus 10 euros for "handling fees".

Of course if the passenger was a tout falsely pretending to be a
legitime railcard owner, it's much more serious.

Cheers

Stanislas

-- 
remplacez "lesptt" par "laposte" pour me joindre
substitute "laposte" for "lesptt" to reach me

DERWENT Re: Accidental fare avoidance!
 Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:28:04 +0100, "Thomas"  


>When I used to travel between Stratford and Camden Rd every day I only used 
>to see RPI's about once a month at Camden. When they did turn up there would 
>be at least 10-15 peple forming an ordely queue clutching a 10 note. 
>


Seems like a resonable rate of return for the passengers. To alter the
balance in favour of buying a season ticket the RPIs need to be there
at least 3 times a month. This of course means employing 3 times as
many RPIs.



PRAR
-- 
<http://www.i.am/prar/> and <http://prar.fotopic.net/>
As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. --Dick Cavett
Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists.
NB Anti-spam measures in force
 - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not prar@deadspam.com

In message <90QMe.7547$4y6.2209@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net>, at 23:47:17 on 
Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Ken Ward  remarked:

>Today was the first time I have ever used a Fast ticket? machine. I bought a
>GM Day Ranger price 2:70.
>The ticket produced was the first one I have had with "square cut" corners.
>All others I have had from the Ticket Office window have had rounded
>corners. Is this the way to tell if a ticket came from a machine?


I'm sure that used to be the case (for the older ticket machines, 
anyway), but as I happens I have in front of me a Fast-Ticket machine 
produced "rounded corners" ticket from earlier this week!

There is also a letter after the price ("X" on mine), which indicates 
how you have paid. Perhaps that's different for a machine-produced 
ticket.
-- 
Roland Perry

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:47:17 GMT, "Ken Ward" 
wrote:


>Today was the first time I have ever used a Fast ticket? machine. I bought a 
>GM Day Ranger price 2:70.


Was it really a FastTicket?  If so, well done to whoever operates that
machine for adding the PTE Ranger to the list.  About time.

I presume it was a FastTicket (touch screen) and not a Quickfare
(buttons, cash only)?

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:19:20 +0100, PRAR  wrote:


>Seems like a resonable rate of return for the passengers. To alter the
>balance in favour of buying a season ticket the RPIs need to be there
>at least 3 times a month. This of course means employing 3 times as
>many RPIs.


....or tripling the PF?

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

>Gosh. Is it normal practice to charge the full price for an adult single,
>rather than charging the difference between the child and the adult fares?
>So you actually end up paying for two tickets - plus another single to come
>back when a return may have been cheaper than two singles. What about
>selling a single to the next station to allow the person to buy a new
>railcard so his existing ticket becomes valid once again - is that
>permissible? 


An exceedingly sensible idea.

Nick

wrote in message 
news:1124313527.318458.84140@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Well I think Penalty Fares are immoral anyway: "so you're a bit late
> and didn't have time to buy a ticket at the station? Right! You're
> going to give us GBP20 of your money! Never mind that we've slapped a
> minimum fare on the Network Card, and our bus division has put fares up
> way above inflation.... We're going to do it anyway!"
>


I always laugh when people say things like that.  I had a rather good 
argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because there 
was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was 
they were going to pay later.  I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint of 
milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:45:01 +0100 someone who may be "JB"
 wrote this:-


>I always laugh when people say things like that.  I had a rather good 
>argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because there 
>was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was 
>they were going to pay later.  I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint of 
>milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR. 


The last queue I stood in at a railway station was 15 minutes to get
a ticket from a ticket machine. Had I stood in the queue for the
ticket office I guess it would have been twice that.

Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

JB wrote:

>  wrote in message
> news:1124313527.318458.84140@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > Well I think Penalty Fares are immoral anyway: "so you're a bit late
> > and didn't have time to buy a ticket at the station? Right! You're
> > going to give us GBP20 of your money! Never mind that we've slapped a
> > minimum fare on the Network Card, and our bus division has put fares up
> > way above inflation.... We're going to do it anyway!"
> >
>
> I always laugh when people say things like that.  I had a rather good
> argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because there
> was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was
> they were going to pay later.  I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint of
> milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR.



Oh that one again.  Aside from the obvious point that the milk doesn't
go away while you are queuing, would supermarkets get away with not
staffing the checkouts properly and then charging a minimum of £20 per
item to anyone who was in a hurry?

It would rightly be seen as a scam, as are penalty fares.

"Roland Perry"  wrote in message 
news:xnZXnDJskCBDFAqI@donald.internetpolicynews.co.uk...

> In message <90QMe.7547$4y6.2209@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net>, at 23:47:17 on Wed, 
> 17 Aug 2005, Ken Ward  remarked:
>>Today was the first time I have ever used a Fast ticket? machine. I bought 
>>a
>>GM Day Ranger price 2:70.
>>The ticket produced was the first one I have had with "square cut" 
>>corners.
>>All others I have had from the Ticket Office window have had rounded
>>corners. Is this the way to tell if a ticket came from a machine?
>
> I'm sure that used to be the case (for the older ticket machines, anyway), 
> but as I happens I have in front of me a Fast-Ticket machine produced 
> "rounded corners" ticket from earlier this week!
>
> There is also a letter after the price ("X" on mine), which indicates how 
> you have paid. Perhaps that's different for a machine-produced ticket.


Mine has a "M"?  I paid cash!

KW

"David Hansen"  wrote in message
news:l1r8g19nh5epr2kus3rk0he1813d30ef83@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:45:01 +0100 someone who may be "JB"
>  wrote this:-
>
> >I always laugh when people say things like that.  I had a rather good
> >argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because
there
> >was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was
> >they were going to pay later.  I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint
of
> >milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR.
>
> The last queue I stood in at a railway station was 15 minutes to get
> a ticket from a ticket machine. Had I stood in the queue for the
> ticket office I guess it would have been twice that.
>
> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?


Yes. Frequently. The Tesco's at Hucknall, despite being the largest Tesco's
store that I've ever seen, generally tends to have only 3 to 4 operating
checkouts with queues of up to 20 minutes.


-- 
Ronnie
--
Have a great day...
....Have a Great Central day.
www.greatcentralrailway.com

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:43042cbc.675591@news.tesco.net...

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:47:17 GMT, "Ken Ward" 
> wrote:
>
>>Today was the first time I have ever used a Fast ticket? machine. I bought 
>>a
>>GM Day Ranger price 2:70.
>
> Was it really a FastTicket?  If so, well done to whoever operates that
> machine for adding the PTE Ranger to the list.  About time.
>
> I presume it was a FastTicket (touch screen) and not a Quickfare
> (buttons, cash only)?


Sorry,
            Being a "Luddite" I refuse to use machines or even recognise 
their existance where possible. The machine in question does seem to have 
been a "Quickfare", buttons not touch-screen. There is only one M'c at 
Bolton so does anyone know?
        Failing that, I will ask it its name next time I am passing.

KW

JB wrote:


> I had a rather good 
> argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because there 
> was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was 
> they were going to pay later. I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint of
> milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR. 


At my local Tescos you pick up the pint of milk first, and then queue to 
pay for it.

Charlie

"Ronnie Clark"  
wrote in message >> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?

>
> Yes. Frequently. The Tesco's at Hucknall, despite being the largest 
> Tesco's
> store that I've ever seen, generally tends to have only 3 to 4 operating
> checkouts with queues of up to 20 minutes.


Why do you (and everyone else) go there?

KW

I've followed this thread with great interest because my own 
station, Earlestown, is triangular with passenger platforms on all 
three sides. It effectively divides the main shopping and 
residential areas of Newton-le-Willows into two parts and has two 
separate entrances two or three hundred yards apart. But there is 
now only one ticket office at the west end of the Liverpool to 
Manchester platform, alongside one of the main streets & bus routes.

I, together with several thousand other Newton-le-Willows people, 
live on the opposite side of the railway triangle to Earlestown 
ticket office. If we are using platforms 4 & 5 on the south to east 
curve, currently served exclusively by the Arriva Trains Wales 
Manchester Piccadilly to Chester & North Wales services, we can only 
reach the booking office by crossing over the two different 
footbridges, in each direction.  That is equal to climbing and 
descending four footbridges and walking over a third of a mile to 
buy a ticket before boarding a train. When you are well into your 
70s this can become quite an ordeal, especially if the train journey 
itself is only an 8 minute ride into Warrington BQ.

In British Rail days this was no problem because many of the train 
crew were local. They would quite willingly sell you most classes of 
ticket on board the train after the Platform 5 ticket office was 
closed and demolished in the 1970s to make way for the WCML 
electrification. But not any more, and there are notices on the 
station warning of the penalties of boarding a train without a 
ticket.

Nowadays, we simply drive our car into Warrington 2 or 3 times per 
week and pay 1 or so parking for up to 3 hours. If we are going for 
a day out to North Wales, or towards or beyond Manchester, we buy 
our rail tickets the previous day, while out shopping locally in 
Newton-le-W. To visit anywhere on Merseyside by rail, we travel 
off-peak on our Senior Citz' passes and don't need to visit the 
ticket office which, ironically in that instance, *IS* close to the 
platforms which we have to use.


Regards,

DigitisED  (Eddie Bellass)

Mythical Merseyside, in the Occupied Territories
of Old Lancashire, United Kingdom.

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free and checked
by a leading anti-virus system - updated continuously.

> Nowadays, we simply drive our car into Warrington 2 or 3 times per
> week and pay £1 or so parking for up to 3 hours


This is what so many railway people entirely fail to understand.
Talking about whether it is right or wrong for someone to turn up at
the last minute and expect to be waved through can only make sense
compared with other travel possibilities. Railway people seem to forget
that people have other options for travel.

Does anyone charge you a penalty fare if you fail to: a) get into your
car five minutes before you're due to leave, b) file a detailed journey
plan, and c) show both parts of your driving licence to a policeman
before you are allowed to depart?

Frankly I find the idea that you have to commit to your destination and
route (and quite often, your time of travel) in advance when travelling
by train - on threat of prosecution - perfectly extraordinary. Imagine
if you had to do that before you could drive anywhere!

Oh if only we could have Oyster for the railways...

Fortunately most conductors RPIs etc do have some common sense. The day
before yesterday my wife wanted to travel from Brighton to Bricket Wood
so, not surprisingly, she bought a ticket for said journey (from a
machine). When attempting to leave St Albans City for the walk to St
Albans Abbey she was told her route wasn't valid. Now, you and I know
this, but she wouldn't, and neither would the vast majority of the
travelling public. Again, the idea that you should somehow hold the
entirety of the fares manual in your head on pain of prosecution if you
get it wrong is ridiculous in the extreme. Anyway, as I say,
commonsense does prevail on occasion, and the chap on the gate didn't
even charge her the extra but let her out after a good talking-to.

Andrew Ward

JB wrote:


> I always laugh when people say things like that.  I had a rather good
> argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because
> there
> was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was
> they were going to pay later.  I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint
> of milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR.


At the supermarket you get the milk, which will not go off right away, then
pay for it.  By the time you've paid, you know you will go away with the
milk you need.  At the station, the train you need to catch might leave
while you're waiting.  Why should passengers be gouged for not wanting to
miss their trains because of the station operator's inadequacies?

As I said last time this came up, I believe customers should have a right
either to buy a ticket within 5 minutes at most or to buy the correct
ticket on the train.  The penalty should then be charged to the station
operator for failing to run its ticket office properly.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 12:34:08 GMT someone who may be "Eddie Bellass"
 wrote this:-


>In British Rail days this was no problem because many of the train 
>crew were local. They would quite willingly sell you most classes of 
>ticket on board the train after the Platform 5 ticket office was 
>closed and demolished in the 1970s to make way for the WCML 
>electrification. But not any more, and there are notices on the 
>station warning of the penalties of boarding a train without a 
>ticket.
>
>Nowadays, we simply drive our car into Warrington 2 or 3 times per 
>week and pay 1 or so parking for up to 3 hours.


An excellent example of an own goal by the railways.

Good managers would do something about this, bad ones would just
quote rules and other excuses about why nothing can be done.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 12:50:31 +0100 someone who may be "Ronnie Clark"
 wrote
this:-


>> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?
>
>Yes. Frequently.


Then you should use an alternative supplier.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:49:32 +0100 someone who may be Adam Funk
 wrote this:-


>As I said last time this came up, I believe customers should have a right
>either to buy a ticket within 5 minutes at most or to buy the correct
>ticket on the train.  The penalty should then be charged to the station
>operator for failing to run its ticket office properly.


Have you suggested this to the various regulators and passenger
"representatives"?


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

OP here. Still following with interest!

This was very useful thank you Iain. I guess a similar letter is what we can
expect and that my son will get a chance to write and explain and appologise
before being taken to court. That's a relief !

I agree with everyone who has said that these insectors have a job to do and
it must be really hard to tell who is genuine and who not. My son did do
wrong by travelling with the out of date card. I'm kicking myself because it
says "Remind Martin to renew railcard" on my calendar for July (but he was
in Japan and it got forgotten) and he's kicking himself for not checking
before he travelled.

But it was an honest mistake, he did not intend to defraud the railways and
all he want is the opportunity to explain that and hopefully not be too
harshly punished.

Thanks to everyone for your interest and support/sympathy

Kath

"Iain Archer"  wrote in message
news:I3EJT3cBtzADFwk3@individual.net...

> Neil Williams wrote on Tue, 16 Aug 2005
> >On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:04:20 GMT, "C Smith"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Find a way to identify every fare dodger and you will be very rich.
> >
> >The idea of penalty fares is that, unless it is glaringly obvious (and
> >I think you'd have to have repeat offences to prove that, or something
> >like purchasing and using a pair of "short" seasons to get through
> >barriers that couldn't be anything but fraud), you don't *have* to.
> >No ticket = PF, regardless of explanation, no excuse.  Similar, IOW,
> >to parking tickets, and in itself a nice deterrent.
>
> A month ago, a letter arrived at home addressed to some unknown person
> who has never AFAIAA lived in the place.  It was from Thameslink
> Prosecutions Department, and said:
>
>   "A person giving the above mentioned name and address was questioned by
>    a member of railway staff on Thursday 19th May 2005 en route near
>    MITCHAM JUNCTION station.  Before I proceed with the investigation of
>    this matter, I afford you the opportunity of responding and giving
>    your explanation concerning this incident."
>    .....
>   "PLEASE DO NOT SEND ANY MONEY WITH YOUR REPLY."
>
> The person named isn't and hasn't been on the electoral register,
> and shouldn't have had any evidence of living at this address.  So I
> e-mailed Thameslink to ask what evidence of address had been proffered.
> The reply contained:
>
>   "It doesn't always transpire that someone has shown evidence of their
>    address. As far as the law is concerned, my inspectors are obliged to
>    accept details given unless they can prove, at the time, that the
>    details are false. This is often very difficult to do."
>
> I've seen RPIs on the phone when questioning people, and assumed that
> they were doing ID and address checks.  But from this correspondence,
> I get the impression that with a bit of nerve and front, you can stand
> a good chance of getting away without paying even a penalty fare.  And
> at what risk, with the Transport Police being so thin on the ground?
> -- 
> Iain Archer            To email, please use Reply-To address

In message , at 11:45:01 on Thu, 
18 Aug 2005, JB  remarked:

>> Well I think Penalty Fares are immoral anyway: "so you're a bit late
>> and didn't have time to buy a ticket at the station? Right! You're
>> going to give us GBP20 of your money! Never mind that we've slapped a
>> minimum fare on the Network Card, and our bus division has put fares up
>> way above inflation.... We're going to do it anyway!"
>
>I always laugh when people say things like that.  I had a rather good
>argument with a customer who didn't think they should get a PF because there
>was a queue at the ticket office where they boarded.  Their argument was
>they were going to pay later.  I suggested that wouldn't work with a pint of
>milk at Tescos so why should it work on BR.


One vital difference being that you can normally get the milk somewhere 
else if the queue is excessive.

Another is that missing getting a pint of milk doesn't get you the sack 
for being late.
-- 
Roland Perry

In message <de1skr$pjn$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk>, at 12:50:31 on Thu, 18 
Aug 2005, Ronnie Clark 
 remarked:

>> The last queue I stood in at a railway station was 15 minutes to get
>> a ticket from a ticket machine. Had I stood in the queue for the
>> ticket office I guess it would have been twice that.
>>
>> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?
>
>Yes. Frequently. The Tesco's at Hucknall, despite being the largest Tesco's
>store that I've ever seen, generally tends to have only 3 to 4 operating
>checkouts with queues of up to 20 minutes.


Something wrong there! The usual big Tesco has about 30 tills, of which 
20 will be working when it's busy. But I never did think Tesco took 
Nottingham seriously, as they've no proper presence in the town.
-- 
Roland Perry

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:22:36 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>In message <90QMe.7547$4y6.2209@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net>, at 23:47:17 on 
>Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Ken Ward  remarked:
>>Today was the first time I have ever used a Fast ticket? machine. I bought a
>>GM Day Ranger price 2:70.
>>The ticket produced was the first one I have had with "square cut" corners.
>>All others I have had from the Ticket Office window have had rounded
>>corners. Is this the way to tell if a ticket came from a machine?
>
>I'm sure that used to be the case (for the older ticket machines, 
>anyway), but as I happens I have in front of me a Fast-Ticket machine 
>produced "rounded corners" ticket from earlier this week!
>
>There is also a letter after the price ("X" on mine), which indicates 
>how you have paid. Perhaps that's different for a machine-produced 
>ticket.


IIRC the letters show how you've paid, M for cash and X for card.

Ken Ward wrote:


>Being a "Luddite" I refuse to use machines or even recognise 
>their existance where possible.


Someone's using your computer...

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

> =====================================================================
> Although my son says he was appologetic, got his wallet out and was
> prepared to pay the penalty fare the inspector said that he felt
> that he had purchased the ticket at a machine in a deliberate
> attempt to defraud the railway
> =====================================================================
>
> A perfect example of someone that thinks they are a mind reader.
>
>


But in the same way if the RPI had assumed the passenger hadn't been 
deliberately defrauding would the RPI not be the same mind reader ??

Not epxressing any opinion on this case but either way he would have to be a 
mind reader.
-- 
DAS,

All opinions are mine and mine alone
http://merseyjcn.fotopic.net/

DERWENT Re: Accidental fare avoidance!
 Thu, 18 Aug 2005 06:41:02 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) 


>On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:19:20 +0100, PRAR  wrote:
>
>>Seems like a resonable rate of return for the passengers. To alter the
>>balance in favour of buying a season ticket the RPIs need to be there
>>at least 3 times a month. This of course means employing 3 times as
>>many RPIs.
>
>...or tripling the PF?


Yes. Although they are doubling/have doubled it.

PRAR
-- 
<http://www.i.am/prar/> and <http://prar.fotopic.net/>
As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. --Dick Cavett
Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists.
NB Anti-spam measures in force
 - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not prar@deadspam.com

On Thursday 18 August 2005 14:10, David Hansen wrote:


> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:49:32 +0100 someone who may be Adam Funk
>  wrote this:-
> 
>>As I said last time this came up, I believe customers should have a
>>right either to buy a ticket within 5 minutes at most or to buy the
>>correct
>>ticket on the train.  The penalty should then be charged to the
>>station operator for failing to run its ticket office properly.
> 
> Have you suggested this to the various regulators and passenger
> "representatives"?


Not yet, but thanks for reminding me.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:47:04 GMT, "Ken Ward" 
wrote:


>Mine has a "M"?  I paid cash!


M=cash, X=credit card.  I don't know the others.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:4304d204.2735513@news.tesco.net...

> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:47:04 GMT, "Ken Ward" 
> wrote:
>
>>Mine has a "M"?  I paid cash!
>
> M=cash, X=credit card.  I don't know the others.
>
> Neil
>
> -- 
> Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
> When replying please use neil at the above domain
> 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
>
>

W= warrent

"Neil Sunderland"  wrote in message 
news:rlg9g1dm9l25ja5s3n6fcv79922knq24h2@4ax.com...

> Ken Ward wrote:
>
>>Being a "Luddite" I refuse to use machines or even recognise
>>their existance where possible.
>
> Someone's using your computer...


Someone's not reading "Like wot I rote".... where possible.

KW

Can anyone tell me whether I need a railcard in order to:
a) buy a discounted ticket
b) use a discounted ticket
c) both.

If it is c) then I am at a disadvantage financially because I may not
necessarily bus and use it on the same day.

Let's say that today is Thursday and I want to buy a ticket for Monday
next week, and return Friday.

Supposing my railcard expires next Wednesday, can I still travel on the
Friday, given that my railcard was valid when I bought the ticket?

I don't remember reading any message on the ticket machine to tell me
that my railcard must be valid on both the outward and return journeys.

Supposing I do not have a railcard, but want to buy one. Should I have
to buy it today in order to travel on Monday? If so, I've wasted four
days. As far as I know I cannot buy a railcard that starts next Monday.

Completely changing the subject, does anyone agree with me that
railcards should not be paper tickets, but should be plastic like a
credit card, and should have to be inserted into the ticket machine in
order to get a discount, just like a Tesco Clubvard at a filling
station? If this were the case Martin would not have made a mistake.

Lastly, can anyone confirm to me that the Ricahrd Crane mentioned in
this thread is NOT the BBRUA (Bedford-Bletchley line user group)
chairman.

Thanks.

Jerry

"Ken Ward"  wrote in message
news:aX_Me.4347$914.4218@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...

>
> "Ronnie Clark"

> wrote in message >> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?
> >
> > Yes. Frequently. The Tesco's at Hucknall, despite being the largest
> > Tesco's
> > store that I've ever seen, generally tends to have only 3 to 4 operating
> > checkouts with queues of up to 20 minutes.
>
> Why do you (and everyone else) go there?


I don't mind the wait :) I only end up in Hucknall in the first place
because I like to get my money's worth out of a Nottingham tram ticket!


-- 
Ronnie
--
Have a great day...
....Have a Great Central day.
www.greatcentralrailway.com

"David Hansen"  wrote in message
news:g229g11jdrjqrcnt5rd0hjc55f7l72485t@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 12:50:31 +0100 someone who may be "Ronnie Clark"
>  wrote
> this:-
>
> >> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?
> >
> >Yes. Frequently.
>
> Then you should use an alternative supplier.


That assumes that the delay bothers me :) I only end up at Tesco's in
Hucknall after riding on the Nottingham tram (the Tesco's is next to the
tram terminus), so I find it a convenient place to shop at some times when
I'm trying to get my money's worth out of the tram ticket.

When I'm in a rush I either go to the Asda at Hyson Green, or more usually
the handily placed local newsagent's/grocer's shop right on the Radford Road
stop (they must be loving the tram - how many other's shop there because
it's right next to the stop?!).

Yes, I know, I have too much time.


-- 
Ronnie
--
Have a great day...
....Have a Great Central day.
www.greatcentralrailway.com

> Lastly, can anyone confirm to me that the Ricahrd Crane mentioned in
> this thread is NOT the BBRUA (Bedford-Bletchley line user group)
> chairman.


I know they are different people as Richard of the BBRUA is a friend 
[who I haven't seen recently] and he's never worked in Revenue.


Mark F

> Can anyone tell me whether I need a railcard in order to:
> a) buy a discounted ticket
> b) use a discounted ticket
> c) both.


The 'quick' answer is...........

a) only from a manned ticket office window if the ticket requires a 
railcard to be valid.

b) only if the ticket requires a valid railcard.

c) sometimes :-)  The ticketing system is so complex and ever changing 
on our railway that only the vigilant [ eg. Barry Salter ] would be able 
to give you the correct answer in many cases..........:-). Most ticket 
offices will have the answer somewhere, hence the queues that never seem 
to get shorter!

You'll need to be more specific to get a more accurate answer.


Mark F

On 18 Aug 2005 13:05:42 -0700, "Jerry" 
wrote:


>I don't remember reading any message on the ticket machine to tell me
>that my railcard must be valid on both the outward and return journeys.


There are messages to that effect in the railcard leaflets. Something
like the (valid) railcard must be carried at all times when
travelling.

I guess that means it must be carried when travelling with discounted
tickets, but I have a feeling that it mimght not actually specify
that!

On 18 Aug 2005 13:05:42, "Jerry"  wrote:


>Can anyone tell me whether I need a railcard in order to:
>a) buy a discounted ticket
>b) use a discounted ticket
>c) both.


Not necessarily.  If you are rail staff then, depending
(a) on who your employer is, and
(b) the date you started working in the rail industry
you can buy a discounted ticket without a railcard


>Supposing my railcard expires next Wednesday, can I still travel on the
>Friday, given that my railcard was valid when I bought the ticket?

No.

>I don't remember reading any message on the ticket machine to tell me
>that my railcard must be valid on both the outward and return journeys.


Yes, it's not on the machine; it's in the terms and conditions
accepted when you signed your application for the railcard.


>Supposing I do not have a railcard, but want to buy one. Should I have
>to buy it today in order to travel on Monday? If so, I've wasted four
>days. As far as I know I cannot buy a railcard that starts next Monday.


No, you can buy it on Monday (but allow extra time at the station for
the transaction).


>Completely changing the subject, does anyone agree with me that
>railcards should not be paper tickets, but should be plastic like a
>credit card, and should have to be inserted into the ticket machine in
>order to get a discount, just like a Tesco Clubvard at a filling
>station? If this were the case Martin would not have made a mistake.


Yes.

Paul Harley

-- 
Remove "eeek" to contact me!

On 18 Aug 2005 05:49:24 -0700, winelight@spamcop.net wrote:


> Frankly I find the idea that you have to commit to your destination and
> route (and quite often, your time of travel) in advance when travelling
> by train - on threat of prosecution - perfectly extraordinary.


I can't understand that statement. If you do not commit to your
destination, how do you know which train to get on?

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632930.html
(D335 at Tyseley, 4 Oct 1987)

wrote in message 
news:1124315463.511877.24100@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> >If there is a terrorist incident/bomb scare or problem where a passenger
>>is being assaulted
>
> I wasn't talking about that; I was talking about this case where
> someone was travelling without realising they did not have a valid
> railcard. Nothing to do with terrorist incidents whatsoever. The
> correct thing for the inspector to have done is to treat the guy with
> respect, and ask for the difference between the YP fare and full fare.
> Fair, respectful, gentlemanly and polite. What should be expected of
> the railways.
>
> Nick
>


The terms and conditions of the railcard don't allow you to charge the 
difference. At the very least you would have to pay the full standard fare 
for the journey being made.

If you bought discounted tickets from a machine say every weekend for a 
month and you were asked for your Yp card say twice in that month and lets 
say you were asked to pay the difference both those times, you are still 
quids in for the other two journeys made that month. If you were asked to 
pay the difference every time in that month you are still only paying in the 
end what you should have paid if you hadn't tried to blag %34 off the 
correct fare.

There needs to be an incentive not to try and do this kinda thing. Of course 
with the situation raised by the original poster it will come down to 
someone deciding if having a YP card which had lapsed 3 weeks ago would be 
beyond a reasonable doubt as to whether it was a mistake or intention to 
avoid payment.

If its a week or so then I usually charge the full fare. Once you start 
getting into months and years (and yes sometimes the railcard is that out of 
date) the sensible thing is to report the facts and let someone decide if it 
is proved beyond all reasonable doubt that there was intention to avoid 
payment.

Just paying the difference isn't the solution.

Steve

"Chris Street"  wrote in message 
news:201bnrucfcaq$.19t2b21t1rr8n.dlg@40tude.net...

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 07:19:36 +0100, David Hansen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:36:11 GMT someone who may be mark
>>  wrote this:-
>>
>>>Yes that is his unique identifying number. Most Revenue people are
>>>unlikely to give anything more than their first name and number these
>>>days for obvious reasons.
>>
>> It is an interesting example of the arrogance of some people that
>> they expect/demand someone else to give them their full name and
>> home address, but will not even provide their full name themselves.
>>
>> Who knows what the arrogant person is going to do with the
>> information? For obvious reasons passengers should be careful about
>> giving such information.
>
> Does a inspector have the right to demand your name and address? If anyone
> other than a police officer asks for it I just refuse point blank.


yes the railway bylaws give an authorised person (the train manager, guard, 
conductor, ticket inspector) authority to require you to give your name and 
address if they suspect you or breaching any railway bylaws (intention to 
avoid payment, refusing to pay, refusing to show a valid ticket / travel 
document) . he / she should explain in simple terms the reason they suspect 
you have breached a bylaw. failure to give those details or giving false 
details is a further offence.

steve

"4sub"  wrote in message 
news:de2jtp$1ot$1@newsm1.svr.pol.co.uk...

>
> "Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
> news:4304d204.2735513@news.tesco.net...
>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:47:04 GMT, "Ken Ward" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Mine has a "M"?  I paid cash!
>>
>> M=cash, X=credit card.  I don't know the others.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>> -- 
>> Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
>> When replying please use neil at the above domain
>> 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
>>
>>
> W= warrent
>


Q cheque

> If you do not commit to your

destination, how do you know which train to get on?

You might change your mind en route and wish to change your
destination. You can certainly do that on trains, by changing trains,
getting off earlier, staying on longer, whatever (especially bearing in
mind that many journeys involve one or more change anyway). By getting
on a particular train you're not committing to anything, any more than
by joining the M4 you're committed to going to Swansea.

Andrew Ward

> What a surprise. (Not).


Actually, I am surprised. I've often ended up at St Albans without the
right ticket, for a variety of complicated reasons, as has my wife
(most recently on Tuesday, see my other posting in this thread). I've
never (yet) been charged a penalty fare and sometimes they don't even
bother to charge the extra.

Andrew Ward

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:24:23 GMT someone who may be "David Skipsey"
<david.skipsey(one)@ntlword.com> wrote this:-


>But in the same way if the RPI had assumed the passenger hadn't been 
>deliberately defrauding would the RPI not be the same mind reader ??


There is a third option, not assuming anything. No mind reading
involved.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On 18 Aug 2005 13:05:42 -0700, "Jerry" 
wrote:


>Let's say that today is Thursday and I want to buy a ticket for Monday
>next week, and return Friday.
>
>Supposing my railcard expires next Wednesday, can I still travel on the
>Friday, given that my railcard was valid when I bought the ticket?


No.  You need a valid Railcard for the journey.


>Supposing I do not have a railcard, but want to buy one. Should I have
>to buy it today in order to travel on Monday? If so, I've wasted four
>days. As far as I know I cannot buy a railcard that starts next Monday.


I'd check that.  I wouldn't be surprised if you could.  I've had a
renewal post-dated by a week or so, and it was issued as a new issue
because it was my "last" one and therefore bought before the previous
one expired.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:03:29 GMT, "Steve" 
wrote:


>The terms and conditions of the railcard don't allow you to charge the 
>difference. At the very least you would have to pay the full standard fare 
>for the journey being made.


Agreed - or a Penalty Fare if in such an area.  This, AFAIAC, would
have been the appropriate course of action in this case.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Steve"  wrote in message 
news:ctaNe.982$jr4.35@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

>
> "4sub"  wrote in message 
> news:de2jtp$1ot$1@newsm1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> "Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
>> news:4304d204.2735513@news.tesco.net...
>>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:47:04 GMT, "Ken Ward" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Mine has a "M"?  I paid cash!
>>>
>>> M=cash, X=credit card.  I don't know the others.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
>>> When replying please use neil at the above domain
>>> 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
>>>
>>>
>> W= warrent
>>
>
> Q cheque


I thought "Q" was at the Ticket Office window.  :-))

OK, I'm going.....

KW

Steve wrote on Fri, 19 Aug 2005

>yes the railway bylaws give an authorised person (the train manager, 
>guard, conductor, ticket inspector) authority to require you to give 
>your name and address if they suspect you or breaching any railway 
>bylaws (intention to avoid payment, refusing to pay, refusing to show a 
>valid ticket / travel document) . he / she should explain in simple 
>terms the reason they suspect you have breached a bylaw. failure to 
>give those details or giving false details is a further offence.


I assume the bylaws don't confer right of arrest.  So if someone gives
her name as Minnie Mouse and declines to say anything more or pay 
whatever's asked, I assume the authorised person can't do more than 
record whatever evidence they may have, call the police, or require her 
to leave the train or station as soon as practicable.  Is that so?  Do 
RPIs carry cameras?
-- 
Iain Archer            To email, please use Reply-To address

On 18 Aug 2005 22:14:21 -0700, winelight@spamcop.net wrote:
I had asked: 

>> If you do not commit to your destination, how do you know which train
>> to get on?
> You might change your mind en route and wish to change your
> destination. You can certainly do that on trains, by changing trains,
> getting off earlier, staying on longer, whatever (especially bearing in
> mind that many journeys involve one or more change anyway). By getting
> on a particular train you're not committing to anything, any more than
> by joining the M4 you're committed to going to Swansea.


Chalk and cheese. It would be rather odd to board a train at Leeds for
Hull and en route decide to go to Ripon instead, for the simple reason
that you cannot get to Ripon by train. My question stands.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p14104756.html
(25 198 at Warrington Bank Quay, 5 Jun 1985)

Iain Archer wrote:


> I assume the bylaws don't confer right of arrest.  So if someone gives
> her name as Minnie Mouse and declines to say anything more or pay
> whatever's asked, I assume the authorised person can't do more than
> record whatever evidence they may have, call the police, or require her
> to leave the train or station as soon as practicable.  Is that so?  Do
> RPIs carry cameras?


I don't know if an Authorised Person could arrest for failure to give a
real name and address.
But if the Police were called, and you gave an address which they
suspected to be not your real one (and I'd suggest Minnie Mouse would
fall into that category), then you could rightly (probably after having
the circumstances of not giving pukker details explained to  you in
small words) expect to be arrested under Section 25 of Pace until your
address could be verified.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:


> Chalk and cheese. It would be rather odd to board a train at Leeds 
> for Hull and en route decide to go to Ripon instead, for the simple 
> reason that you cannot get to Ripon by train. My question stands.


I think you're being unreasonable, you know.  * While you're on the 
train, you get a phone call telling you the person you're heading to 
meet has been called somewhere else urgently.  * While you're on the 
train, you find you've been delayed to such an extent that if you 
completed the originally planned journey, you'd have no time to do 
what you went for, or indeed that you'd miss the last train back.  
* After setting off for a nice boating expedition, you hear an urgent 
gale warning on the radio.  Etc. etc.

There's all kinds of reasons to re-schedule the original plans once 
you've bought a ticket, and started your journey.  On a recent trip, 
due to the increasing delay, it was looking as if I would miss my last 
onward connection - my nephew had offered to collect me from there by 
car if need be.[1]

In a car you can easily take a different turn en route, and you don't 
have to pay for the originally planned miles that you haven't in fact 
driven!  Unlike the rail ticket, once it's been bought and part used.

ttfn

[1] In the event, the delay turned out to be 12 minutes less than 2 
hours, meaning that it was still feasible to catch the only remaining 
onward connection - but their compensation vouchers were a mere 25% 
for a 1 hour delay, proudly explaining in their covering note that 
thanks to the delay into Crewe being those 12 minutes less than the 
full 2 hours, they didn't have to pay the 100% compensation which 
would have been due for a 2 hour delay, ho hum.  One would have 
thought they'd manage to voluntarily fork out a bit more than a measly 
25% on account of the extra 48 minutes, but it seems not....

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:47:32 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:
>> It would be rather odd to board a train at Leeds for Hull and en
>> route decide to go to Ripon instead, for the simple reason that you
>> cannot get to Ripon by train.
> I think you're being unreasonable, you know. There's all kinds of
> reasons to re-schedule the original plans once you've bought a ticket


No doubt there are, but I was responding to the following suggestion:
** The idea that you must commit to your destination, route and time of
travel in advance when going by train is perfectly extraordinary. **
Your examples are of changed plans, not the absence of a plan.


> In a car ... you don't have to pay for the originally planned miles
> that you haven't in fact driven!

.... and precisely the same principle (subject to an admin fee) applies
to a rail ticket for a part-completed journey.

"Chris Tolley"  wrote

>
> No doubt there are, but I was responding to the following suggestion:
> ** The idea that you must commit to your destination, route and time of
> travel in advance when going by train is perfectly extraordinary. **
> Your examples are of changed plans, not the absence of a plan.
>

The plan might be to have a day out. The decision on where to go might
depend on which train turns up first. On LUL you can cope with this, or
changed plans, with Oyster PrePay - we need Oyster to go national.

Peter

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:03:36 +0000 (UTC), Peter Masson wrote:

> The plan might be to have a day out. The decision on where to go might
> depend on which train turns up first. On LUL you can cope with this, or
> changed plans, with Oyster PrePay - we need Oyster to go national.


Yesterday, we did just that. My wife and I planned to have a day out,
and the outline plan made the previous night was changed at stage 1 when
I found I couldn't park at Huddersfield station because of a continental
market being held there. So then it was off to try Deighton (no use - no
car park at all) and then (missing Mirfield and Ravensthorpe because I
already knew of their poor car parking arrangements) on to Dewsbury
which did. From then on, a pleasant afternoon was had playing on the
trains of West Yorkshire for the sum of six quid between us - spent at
Huddersfield - for which we got Dewsbury - Leeds - South Elmsall - Leeds
- Ilkley - Leeds - Dewsbury. Very impressive value. Congrats also to WY
Metro for producing a handy TT book with all their lines in. We'll be
back again to play some more, on another day off, later in the year.

Thanks for these answers.

My railcard example was hypothetical. I was trying to work out if the
rail industy had a financial advantage over the passenger.

Jerry

David Hansen wrote:


> The last queue I stood in at a railway station was 15 minutes to get
> a ticket from a ticket machine. Had I stood in the queue for the
> ticket office I guess it would have been twice that.


It's a _long_ time since I had to queue more than 10 minutes.
 

> Have you seen such long queues at Tesco?


Not in Tesco, because I don't shop there, but I have queued for over
15 minutes in Somerfield before now.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

Charlie Hulme wrote:


> At my local Tescos you pick up the pint of milk first, and then queue to 
> pay for it.


Sure, but you don't _drink_ it before you've paid for it...

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

Roland Perry wrote:


> One vital difference being that you can normally get the milk 
> somewhere else if the queue is excessive.


Yes. And passengers can travel by other means if they are not
satisfied with the queueing situation.
 

> Another is that missing getting a pint of milk doesn't get you the 
> sack for being late.


Depends, if you're buying it on your way to work, maybe for the staff
kitchen, and the queue is very long, you arrive late...

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

Jerry wrote:


> Can anyone tell me whether I need a railcard in order to:
> a) buy a discounted ticket
> b) use a discounted ticket
> c) both.


If you are buying it from a ticket office, you need a railcard to buy
it. From a machine or over the internet, you don't.

You _do_ need a valid railcard when you are travelling.
 

> If it is c) then I am at a disadvantage financially because I may not
> necessarily buy and use it on the same day.


I'm sure when you buy your railcard, you can ask for it to start at a
future date. As long as that date is no later than the date you are
buying a ticket for, you can get the reduction.
 

> Supposing my railcard expires next Wednesday, can I still travel on the
> Friday, given that my railcard was valid when I bought the ticket?


No. Or else you could buy a year's worth of tickets the day before
your railcard expired. Your railcard must be valid on any day you are
travelling on a railcard-discounted ticket.
 

> Completely changing the subject, does anyone agree with me that
> railcards should not be paper tickets, but should be plastic like a
> credit card, and should have to be inserted into the ticket machine in
> order to get a discount, just like a Tesco Clubvard at a filling
> station? If this were the case Martin would not have made a mistake.


I do think that the current system makes fraudulent travel too easy,
for people buying from machines or over the internet. You could also
require that people type in the railcard number when buying over the
internet - I'm assuming that a computer could record what numbered
railcards were in use and current.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

In message , at 01:35:07 on 
Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Stevie D  remarked:

>> The last queue I stood in at a railway station was 15 minutes to get
>> a ticket from a ticket machine. Had I stood in the queue for the
>> ticket office I guess it would have been twice that.
>
>It's a _long_ time since I had to queue more than 10 minutes.


I didn't have to queue because I was just picking up a FastTicket, but 
when I was at Nottingham station on Monday the queue (for advance 
tickets) was twice as long as normal, normal taking 15 minutes.

I suppose you could argue that you won't be missing a train if you have 
to wait 30 minutes to get an advance ticket, but it's hardly a good 
advert for the railway system.
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 01:39:08 on 
Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Stevie D  remarked:

>Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> One vital difference being that you can normally get the milk
>> somewhere else if the queue is excessive.
>
>Yes. And passengers can travel by other means if they are not
>satisfied with the queueing situation.


Indeed, they go by car. Or if they are poorer, find some other kind of 
cake to eat.


>> Another is that missing getting a pint of milk doesn't get you the
>> sack for being late.
>
>Depends, if you're buying it on your way to work, maybe for the staff
>kitchen, and the queue is very long, you arrive late...


Wriggling a bit, aren't we?
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 01:46:30 on 
Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Stevie D  remarked:

>I do think that the current system makes fraudulent travel too easy,
>for people buying from machines or over the internet. You could also
>require that people type in the railcard number when buying over the
>internet - I'm assuming that a computer could record what numbered
>railcards were in use and current.


The computers they currently use can't even display the correct 
information when delivering your ticket. I am frequently told by a 
FastTicket machine display that I need a railcard (when I don't) or that 
the ticket is valid for 30 days (when it's for two specific trains that 
same day).
-- 
Roland Perry

On Saturday 20 August 2005 01:37, Stevie D wrote:


> Charlie Hulme wrote:
> 
>> At my local Tescos you pick up the pint of milk first, and then queue
>> to pay for it.
> 
> Sure, but you don't _drink_ it before you've paid for it...


But you know you'll get it.  You won't miss the opportunity to get the
milk you need because of the time spent in the queue.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:59:49 +0100, Adam Funk 
wrote:


>But you know you'll get it.  You won't miss the opportunity to get the
>milk you need because of the time spent in the queue.


<tenuous> You might miss your lunch break and therefore not get to
drink it for another hour? </tenuous>

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Roland Perry"  wrote

>
> One vital difference being that you can normally get the milk somewhere
> else if the queue is excessive.
>
> Another is that missing getting a pint of milk doesn't get you the sack
> for being late.


If I'm buying a newspaper and there's a queue buying lottery tickets, I'll
put the money for the paper down by the till and walk out. Plenty of other
people do the same, so this behaviour would appear to be deemed acceptable.
I'd probably do the same if buying a single item (pint of milk?) in a
supermarket, if there was an unreasonably long queue. Unfortunately the same
aproach can't be used when buying rail travel, because you need the ticket.

Peter

"Roland Perry"  wrote in message 
news:htezVmZy9sBDFAoV@donald.internetpolicynews.co.uk...


>
> The computers they currently use can't even display the correct 
> information when delivering your ticket. I am frequently told by a 
> FastTicket machine display that I need a railcard (when I don't) or that 
> the ticket is valid for 30 days (when it's for two specific trains that 
> same day).
> -- 
> Roland Perry


I bought a CDR last month on a weekday and took the Railcard and Network 
Card options, and of course no discount was available due to the 10.00 
pound limit.  The tickets were still printed with the NSE indicator, and the 
price of 5.95 ish.

Cue long debate with on train RPI who wanted to issue a penalty fare for 
using a railcard when not permitted. It wasn't until I persuaded him to look 
the actual fare up on his machine that he decided he would 'let me off'.

Presumably it is a logic fault in the Fast Ticket m/c, along the lines of 
'If passenger requests discount print NSE even if not permitted'!

I have written to One to ask them for their thoughts.

Paul

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:17:33 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
 wrote:


>If I'm buying a newspaper and there's a queue buying lottery tickets, I'll
>put the money for the paper down by the till and walk out. Plenty of other
>people do the same, so this behaviour would appear to be deemed acceptable.


WH Smith used to have honesty boxes for exactly this purpose.  They
disappeared, so I suspect there were too many who took advantage and
failed to pay the correct amount for their newspaper.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:39:10 +0000 (UTC), "Paul Scott"
 wrote:


>Presumably it is a logic fault in the Fast Ticket m/c, along the lines of 
>'If passenger requests discount print NSE even if not permitted'!


There can be good reasons for doing this.  Some time ago VT offered
half-price fares on all fares they set in compensation for
something-or-other.  No railcard discounts were available - however,
the VT condition of Savers being valid by any train when purchased
with a Railcard remained.  Thus, tickets were issued semi-manually
with the Y-P marker but only the "standard" 50% discount, not 50%+34%,
for people (including me) to take advantage of this.

Assuming you were travelling after 10am I think the RPI was strictly
speaking wrong anyhow.  NSE cards aren't banned at that time, there is
just a 10 pound minimum discounted fare.  If the fare was 10.05, it
would be discounted to 10.00.  If it's 9.95, it remains 9.95, but
while using the Railcard is pointless I don't believe it is
disallowed.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Neil Williams wrote:


> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:17:33 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>>If I'm buying a newspaper and there's a queue buying lottery tickets, I'll
>>put the money for the paper down by the till and walk out. Plenty of other
>>people do the same, so this behaviour would appear to be deemed acceptable.
> 
> 
> WH Smith used to have honesty boxes for exactly this purpose.  They
> disappeared, so I suspect there were too many who took advantage and
> failed to pay the correct amount for their newspaper.


Still there at Manchester Piccadilly the last time I looked.

Charlie

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:39:18 GMT, Charlie Hulme
 wrote:


>Still there at Manchester Piccadilly the last time I looked.


Not seen one in a high-street store for some time.  I wonder if the
economics of it are different in railway stations - i.e. less space
for more tills[1] and more sales of newspapers on their own.

[1] At the WHS in Central Milton Keynes there is rarely a queue of
more than one or two, as there are something like 8 tills of which at
least 4 are normally manned, plus the one or two in the stationery
department upstairs.  Manc Picc has, I recall, only 2 or 3.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:34:21 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:


>On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:17:33 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
> wrote:
>
>>If I'm buying a newspaper and there's a queue buying lottery tickets, I'll
>>put the money for the paper down by the till and walk out. Plenty of other
>>people do the same, so this behaviour would appear to be deemed acceptable.
>
>WH Smith used to have honesty boxes for exactly this purpose.  They
>disappeared, so I suspect there were too many who took advantage and
>failed to pay the correct amount for their newspaper.


The honesty boxes are still in use in most of the big Travel stores,
certainly I use the one in Reading station every morning and about
half of the High Street stores.

I don't think many retailers will want to use such a scheme because
they lose control of the product file. It only works with newspapers
because they are returned daily and therefore have a method of
calculating the sales of each title. 

Duncan.

Stevie D wrote:

> David Hansen wrote:
> 
> 
>>The last queue I stood in at a railway station was 15 minutes to get
>>a ticket from a ticket machine. Had I stood in the queue for the
>>ticket office I guess it would have been twice that.
> 
> 
> It's a _long_ time since I had to queue more than 10 minutes.


I've queued for 10 minutes before - and then spent 20 minutes buying the 
ticket because it takes so long to find sort out seat reservations and 
find the cheapest ticket (checking the fares manual, etc.). I felt a bit 
sorry for the people behind me in  the queue, but if there's only one 
ticket window and it takes so long to buy a simple ticket because their 
systems are so slow and laborious, then it's not really my fault.

-- 
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather: http://www.canterburyweather.co.uk/
Reverse my e-mail address to reply by e-mail

Roland Perry wrote:


> The computers they currently use can't even display the correct 
> information when delivering your ticket. I am frequently told by a 
> FastTicket machine display that I need a railcard (when I don't)


Under what circumstances do you not need a railcard, and the machine
tells you that you do?


> the ticket is valid for 30 days (when it's for two specific trains that 
> same day).


If it is a Standard Open or Saver ticket then the return part is valid
for one month, whether you choose to reserve seats to return the same
day or not.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 12:18:11 GMT someone who may be "David Skipsey"
<david.skipsey(one)@ntlword.com> wrote this:-


>And what would you have done ?


Taken the money that was offered and issued the appropriate ticket.
No mind reading necessary for this course of action.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"Dave Babb"  writes:


> I don't know if an Authorised Person could arrest for failure to give a
> real name and address.
> But if the Police were called, and you gave an address which they
> suspected to be not your real one (and I'd suggest Minnie Mouse would
> fall into that category), then you could rightly (probably after having
> the circumstances of not giving pukker details explained to  you in
> small words) expect to be arrested under Section 25 of Pace until your
> address could be verified.


Do any of these regulations which require someone to give name and
address stipulate that it must be the "postal address of your place of
residence"? Otherwise an email address is just as valid an address as
a postal one.

In message , at 14:35:44 on 
Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Stevie D  remarked:

>> The computers they currently use can't even display the correct
>> information when delivering your ticket. I am frequently told by a
>> FastTicket machine display that I need a railcard (when I don't)
>
>Under what circumstances do you not need a railcard, and the machine
>tells you that you do?


On the route I travel I don't qualify for any Railcards, and don't have 
one. So I'm buying whatever's the cheapest ticket (often advance 
purchase) and without any railcard discount.


>> the ticket is valid for 30 days (when it's for two specific trains that
>> same day).
>
>If it is a Standard Open or Saver ticket then the return part is valid
>for one month, whether you choose to reserve seats to return the same
>day or not.


I know, but the tickets in question were advance purchase tickets, valid 
on specified trains only!
-- 
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:


> On the route I travel I don't qualify for any Railcards, and don't have 
> one. So I'm buying whatever's the cheapest ticket (often advance 
> purchase) and without any railcard discount.
....
> I know, but the tickets in question were advance purchase tickets, valid 
> on specified trains only!


Are you sure the machine isn't confusing you with someone else?!

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

On Saturday 20 August 2005 12:39, Charlie Hulme wrote:


> Neil Williams wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:17:33 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>If I'm buying a newspaper and there's a queue buying lottery tickets,
>>>I'll put the money for the paper down by the till and walk out.
>>>Plenty of other people do the same, so this behaviour would appear to
>>>be deemed acceptable.
>> 
>> 
>> WH Smith used to have honesty boxes for exactly this purpose.  They
>> disappeared, so I suspect there were too many who took advantage and
>> failed to pay the correct amount for their newspaper.
> 
> Still there at Manchester Piccadilly the last time I looked.


Yes, I used it on Thursday.

>
> Taken the money that was offered and issued the appropriate ticket.
> No mind reading necessary for this course of action.
>


You have assumed he was genuine. (note I mean generically not the person who 
posted the original, I wasn't there so can't comment, you seem to know he 
was innocent)

So how did you know ?

Or do you always accept the explanation given at the time ?

For example :-

Sorry mate I slipped as I was passing your house and fell through your 
window and then the TV stuck to my arm as I was leaving - honest.

-- 
DAS,

All opinions are mine and mine alone
http://merseyjcn.fotopic.net/

In message , at 18:28:21 on 
Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Stevie D  remarked:

>> On the route I travel I don't qualify for any Railcards, and don't have
>> one. So I'm buying whatever's the cheapest ticket (often advance
>> purchase) and without any railcard discount.
>...
>> I know, but the tickets in question were advance purchase tickets, valid
>> on specified trains only!
>
>Are you sure the machine isn't confusing you with someone else?!


Of course not! These are tickets for me, that I've ordered, and then 
pick up.

Although a few years ago I did find a GNER ticket machine at KX that was 
handing out Credit Card receipts for the previous transaction to each 
punter. I suppose it had one of those concertina feeds with an extra 
kink in it.
-- 
Roland Perry

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:58:03 GMT, "David Skipsey"
<david.skipsey(one)@ntlword.com> wrote:


>Sorry mate I slipped as I was passing your house and fell through your 
>window and then the TV stuck to my arm as I was leaving - honest.


Which is rather less likely to be genuine than an expired railcard
accidentally being used to purchase a ticket.

There have been at least three genuine cases of this, as I did it
three times before I, or a member of railway staff, noticed that the
railcard had in fact expired.  I would be most surprised if that was
all there had ever been.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:430898d4.1488540@news.tesco.net...

> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:58:03 GMT, "David Skipsey"
> <david.skipsey(one)@ntlword.com> wrote:
>
>>Sorry mate I slipped as I was passing your house and fell through your
>>window and then the TV stuck to my arm as I was leaving - honest.
>
> Which is rather less likely to be genuine than an expired railcard
> accidentally being used to purchase a ticket.
>
> There have been at least three genuine cases of this, as I did it
> three times before I, or a member of railway staff, noticed that the
> railcard had in fact expired.  I would be most surprised if that was
> all there had ever been.
>
> Neil
>
> -- 
> Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
> When replying please use neil at the above domain
> 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
>
>

A lot of 'jobs' came from railcards
Normally YP.
Usually two passengers travelling together could only produce one railcard 
for the two sets of tickets. Purchased at different windows at different 
times...........Yawn.

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:19:10 +0100, "4sub"  wrote:


>A lot of 'jobs' came from railcards
>Normally YP.
>Usually two passengers travelling together could only produce one railcard 
>for the two sets of tickets. Purchased at different windows at different 
>times...........Yawn. 


Yes.  That is rather different from travelling accidentally on a card
that had expired by a few days.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:4308a25f.3930692@news.tesco.net...

> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:19:10 +0100, "4sub"  wrote:
>
>>A lot of 'jobs' came from railcards
>>Normally YP.
>>Usually two passengers travelling together could only produce one railcard
>>for the two sets of tickets. Purchased at different windows at different
>>times...........Yawn.
>
> Yes.  That is rather different from travelling accidentally on a card
> that had expired by a few days.
>
> Neil
>
> -- 
> Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
> When replying please use neil at the above domain
> 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
>
>

I know, as I said at the beginning two sides to a story and in the middle 
the truth.
I expect the Revenue Protection Manager will read a decide whether Bill or 
Prosecutions unit, just as I used to.

OP here.

I do understand how difficult it must be for the ticket inspectors to decide
whether an excuse is genuine or not and both Martin and I realise that he
was wrong to travel with the expired card - even though it really was
accidental. It was a fair cop in other words. I feel that the handling of it
was harsh but then I know that it was a genuine mistake, the inspector
doesn't.

However what wasn't really explained is what happens next. The inspector
seemed to imply to my son that he would definately be prosecuted and
mentioned large sums of money.

4Sub you seem to know all about this. Do I understand that in fact the
matter is referred to someone else who makes a decision whether to prosecute
or not? Does my son get a chance to write and explain his mistake and
appologise again - the notes taken by the inspector at the time were too
brief to accurately reflect what happened - but he did sign them. No-one in
my immediate family has ever been prosecuted for anything before and we
really feel quite worried about it all as we just don't know what happens.

Also he was told not to even try to purchase a new travel card or he would
be in "big trouble". Will he eventually be able to buy a new card? As a
student it is very useful indeed to him, in fact he really won't be able to
afford use the trains without it.

Kath

"4sub"  wrote in message
news:dea8ea$md2$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...

>
> "Neil Williams"  wrote in message
> news:4308a25f.3930692@news.tesco.net...
> > On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:19:10 +0100, "4sub"  wrote:
> >
> >>A lot of 'jobs' came from railcards
> >>Normally YP.
> >>Usually two passengers travelling together could only produce one
railcard
> >>for the two sets of tickets. Purchased at different windows at different
> >>times...........Yawn.
> >
> > Yes.  That is rather different from travelling accidentally on a card
> > that had expired by a few days.
> >
> > Neil
> >
> > -- 
> > Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
> > When replying please use neil at the above domain
> > 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
> >
> >
> I know, as I said at the beginning two sides to a story and in the middle
> the truth.
> I expect the Revenue Protection Manager will read a decide whether Bill or
> Prosecutions unit, just as I used to.
>
>

In message <dec32m$799$1@yarrow.open.ac.uk>, at 09:49:13 on Mon, 22 Aug 
2005, Kath  remarked:

>Also he was told not to even try to purchase a new travel card or he would
>be in "big trouble". Will he eventually be able to buy a new card? As a
>student it is very useful indeed to him, in fact he really won't be able to
>afford use the trains without it.


Is there a condition on holding a YP card that you must not have an 
impending prosecution? That would very easy to determine from reading 
the small print on the application form.

And it's always possible you'll never hear from them again, so some idea 
of what "closure" to expect would be useful. I think road traffic 
offences, for example, require you get a notice of impending prosecution 
in 14 days.
-- 
Roland Perry

Neil Williams wrote:

> 
> Not seen one in a high-street store for some time.  I wonder if the
> economics of it are different in railway stations - i.e. less space
> for more tills[1] and more sales of newspapers on their own.


I suspect they work at stations because more people are buying just
a paper, and more customers have a train to catch, than in the high
street. If there's a queue and no honesty box, customers are likely
not to buy a paper, or go elsewhere.

The small amount of theft that will inevitably result from honesty
boxes is outweighed by the extra sales and customer satisfaction
that comes from treating customers as basically honest. Perhaps the
railway could learn something from this...

Cheers

mark-r

-- 
"Let's meet the panel. You couldn't ask for four finer comedians -
so that answers your next question..."
 -- Humphrey Lyttleton

"Kath"  wrote in message 
news:dec32m$799$1@yarrow.open.ac.uk...

> OP here.
>
> I do understand how difficult it must be for the ticket inspectors to 
> decide
> whether an excuse is genuine or not and both Martin and I realise that he
> was wrong to travel with the expired card - even though it really was
> accidental. It was a fair cop in other words. I feel that the handling of 
> it
> was harsh but then I know that it was a genuine mistake, the inspector
> doesn't.
>
> However what wasn't really explained is what happens next. The inspector
> seemed to imply to my son that he would definately be prosecuted and
> mentioned large sums of money.
>
> 4Sub you seem to know all about this. Do I understand that in fact the
> matter is referred to someone else who makes a decision whether to 
> prosecute
> or not? Does my son get a chance to write and explain his mistake and
> appologise again - the notes taken by the inspector at the time were too
> brief to accurately reflect what happened - but he did sign them. No-one 
> in
> my immediate family has ever been prosecuted for anything before and we
> really feel quite worried about it all as we just don't know what happens.
>
> Also he was told not to even try to purchase a new travel card or he would
> be in "big trouble". Will he eventually be able to buy a new card? As a
> student it is very useful indeed to him, in fact he really won't be able 
> to
> afford use the trains without it.
>
> Kath
>
> "4sub"  wrote in message
> news:dea8ea$md2$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> "Neil Williams"  wrote in message
>> news:4308a25f.3930692@news.tesco.net...
>> > On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:19:10 +0100, "4sub"  wrote:
>> >
>> >>A lot of 'jobs' came from railcards
>> >>Normally YP.
>> >>Usually two passengers travelling together could only produce one
> railcard
>> >>for the two sets of tickets. Purchased at different windows at 
>> >>different
>> >>times...........Yawn.
>> >
>> > Yes.  That is rather different from travelling accidentally on a card
>> > that had expired by a few days.
>> >
>> > Neil
>> >
>> > -- 
>> > Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
>> > When replying please use neil at the above domain
>> > 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.
>> >
>> >
>> I know, as I said at the beginning two sides to a story and in the middle
>> the truth.
>> I expect the Revenue Protection Manager will read a decide whether Bill 
>> or
>> Prosecutions unit, just as I used to.
>>
>>

The Inspector is not allowed to say 'definately be prosecuted '.
If the inspector did say that the matter cannot be progressed from the 
railway side.
I detect 'a bully' here.
The MG11 pad is a poor mans statement designed in my personal view to look 
like 'a penalty fare' it very much is not.
Best wait to what happens now, in my experience a letter from you would not 
help.
However he may be asked to make a further statement then have someone with 
him.

Get himself another railcard by the way. Why not?

In article , 
winelight@spamcop.net writes

>Fortunately most conductors RPIs etc do have some common sense. The day
>before yesterday my wife wanted to travel from Brighton to Bricket Wood
>so, not surprisingly, she bought a ticket for said journey (from a
>machine). When attempting to leave St Albans City for the walk to St
>Albans Abbey she was told her route wasn't valid. Now, you and I know
>this,


Speak for yourself.

Bricket Wood: routeing points are Bedford, Watford Junction, and West 
Hampstead. I would *GUESS* that the Fares Rule rules out Bedford but not 
the other two.

Brighton to West Hampstead includes map LB. The shortest route from 
there to Bricket Wood is almost certainly via St.Albans - map LB even 
shows the Abbey Flyer!

<FX: checks>

Okay, I'm wrong - it's 17m65c via Willesden and Watford Junctions, but 
19m06c via St.Albans.

How Wood is exactly a mile closer to St.Albans Abbey, so that *would* be 
valid.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather                       | Home: 
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work)             | Web:  <http://www.davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937                    | Work: 
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Mark Robinson wrote:

> Neil Williams wrote:
> >
> > Not seen one in a high-street store for some time.  I wonder if the
> > economics of it are different in railway stations - i.e. less space
> > for more tills[1] and more sales of newspapers on their own.
>
> I suspect they work at stations because more people are buying just
> a paper, and more customers have a train to catch, than in the high
> street. If there's a queue and no honesty box, customers are likely
> not to buy a paper, or go elsewhere.


The town stores are run by a different division to those on railway
stations. I discovered this when I tried to pay at a WHS on a station
with an Amex card. They don't accept it; town branches do.


-- 
Regards

Mike

Roland Perry wrote:


> Is there a condition on holding a YP card that you must not have an 
> impending prosecution? That would very easy to determine from reading 
> the small print on the application form.


No, but it's quite possible that they would refuse to issue a card to
anyone who had an unexpired conviction for fraudulent rail travel.

I don't think they do - simply from the speed with which they issue
new cards, but I couldn't promise that for certain.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________