Railway silly season

[The Large One]

This situation is something like what happened to me recently. I purchased an advance purchase single ticket for the 11:17 Victoria to Eastbourne train for around £8. I decided to leave the train at Lewes as a mate of mine asked if I wanted to go for a pint. After a few pints of Harveys I went back to the station and there were some ticket inspectors on the station entrance where the car park is. They told me that I would have to purchase a new ticket as this ticket was only valid on the 11:17 train from Victoria to Eastbourne and on THAT train only. They also said that strictly speaking I should have continued on that train to Eastbourne and not left the train at Lewes. I had to pay again to get to Eastbourne, fair dos I say. Even with the single from Lewes to Eastbourne I still think its a fair deal. Rules are rules I guess?

The difference is - you were not fined for getting off, in your instance, at Lewes.

 

[Easy 10]

Rules are rules I guess?

And therein lies the reason why rail companies can so routinely take their paying customers, bend them over the barrier, and give it to them hard and fast right up the puckered fudge tunnel. They know enough people will accept their nonsensical rules and unfair rip-offs with a weary sigh. And after a grumble, cough up.

"I'm afraid those are the T&C's sir".

 

[beorhthelm]

But we're going round and round in circles. Quite clearly, either the pricing or the Ts & Cs are completely and utterly ridiculous.

yes indeed they are both ridiculous, but there we are, so are alot of things. the evening shift has come on and still seems the focus is on whether its right or not to apply the T&Cs (or the contract of sale).

im still a little suprised at the apparrently common opinon that contracts determined by rail companies should not have to be adhered to (however stupid, but it seems this point is not so important and keeps being put aside). many people elsewhere take this a step further and think they should not pay at all for use of the public service (which is over charging/profiteering blah, etc). im struggling to see exactly where the defining line now is between following the rules with accepted punishment for transgressions, and breaking any rules with impunity.

 

[clapham_gull]

If train companies are allowed to broaden the definition of "breaking a journey" we're quite entitled to broaden the definition of "being completely ripped out".

 

[Easy 10]

yes indeed they are both ridiculous, but there we are, so are alot of things. the evening shift has come on and still seems the focus is on whether its right or not to apply the T&Cs (or the contract of sale).

im still a little suprised at the apparrently common opinon that contracts determined by rail companies should not have to be adhered to (however stupid, but it seems this point is not so important and keeps being put aside). many people elsewhere take this a step further and think they should not pay at all for use of the public service (which is over charging/profiteering blah, etc). im struggling to see exactly where the defining line now is between following the rules with accepted punishment for transgressions, and breaking any rules with impunity.

I'm still not satisfied that this forbidden "break" in the journey (as termed in the all-important T&C's) is the same thing as an early "termination" of the journey. A break in the journey would seem to imply a pause, ie disembarking but with the intention of continuing it later.

I'm sure if these folk who have fallen foul of the smallprint had the time and will to contest it, they'd have a case there.

 

[clapham_gull]

yes indeed they are both ridiculous, but there we are, so are alot of things. the evening shift has come on and still seems the focus is on whether its right or not to apply the T&Cs (or the contract of sale).

im still a little suprised at the apparrently common opinon that contracts determined by rail companies should not have to be adhered to (however stupid, but it seems this point is not so important and keeps being put aside). many people elsewhere take this a step further and think they should not pay at all for use of the public service (which is over charging/profiteering blah, etc). im struggling to see exactly where the defining line now is between following the rules with accepted punishment for transgressions, and breaking any rules with impunity.

But consumers have absolutely no control in what goes in those contracts.

I have always considered the term "breaking a journey" to mean splitting a single journey into more than one part.

I had no idea that "breaking a journey" also now includes terminating your journey at an earlier possibility.

What you basically saying is every time I jump on a train, I need to consult the current definitions of every term on the small print on the ticket ?

It's a bloody rail journey - I'm not buying a house or going into business with Richard Branson.

The fine is there for one reason and one reason only. It's an easily collectable occasional revenue stream because the ridiculously complicated ticketing in this country occasionally confuses people.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The fine is there for one reason and one reason only. It's an easily collectable occasional revenue stream because the ridiculously complicated ticketing in this country occasionally confuses people.

I would also argue the "fines" are not leagally enforceable in this type of case - much like the private parking fines such as those at Homebase by G24.

 

[clapham_gull]

I would also argue the "fines" are not leagally enforceable in this type of case - much like the private parking fines such as those at Homebase by G24.

Oh they probably are, there is specific legislation that covers the railways.

I love to see someone challenge the definition of breaking a journey, or perhaps simply where the Human Rights sits in relation to fining someone for leaving a train.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm still not satisfied that this forbidden "break" in the journey (as termed in the all-important T&C's) is the same thing as an early "termination" of the journey. A break in the journey would seem to imply a pause, ie disembarking but with the intention of continuing it later.

I'm sure if these folk who have fallen foul of the smallprint had the time and will to contest it, they'd have a case there.

and i think you are still barking up the wrong tree. i dont think they are the same thing either, but both are valid clauses people agree to when buying their ticket. i dont see why one is agreeable and another not, just because it is seen as rather silly - its still the terms agreed to either way. I think its ridiculous that smoking on an open platform is considerd illegal while in a bus shelter isnt, but we accpet that as long as this is the law we will be punished as appropriate for breaking the law.

But consumers have absolutely no control in what goes in those contracts.
...
What you basically saying is every time I jump on a train, I need to consult the current definitions of every term on the small print on the ticket ?

no, but consumers do usually have the choice in their actions whether to abide by the contract or not. frankly if your getting an 80% discount ticket then you should consult the small print.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

and i think you are still barking up the wrong tree. i dont think they are the same thing either, but both are valid clauses people agree to when buying their ticket.

You don't when buying a ticket from SWT or Southern if the conditions on their website are correct.

 

[Pinkie Brown]

South West Trains are one of the worst companies for inflated fare's & jobsworth inspectors. With Stagecoach as the parent company, this is to be expected. This story doesn't surprise me. I look forward to the day when the railways are re nationalised & run as a public service, not for the benefit of shareholders & fat cat managers.

How many passengers have ever been taken to court for refusing to pay a penalty fare by South West Trains & any other train company? Exactly ZERO! Why? Because the train companies know they're on dodgy legal ground & are scared of losing a test case in court. Yes, they'll send you lots of intimidating letters full of legal & threatening jargon that threaten you with all sorts of dire penalties. Keep ignoring their threat's & they'll give up. Its laughable when they threaten you with the magistrates court when the only legal recourse they have is through the small claims court. They will give up eventually. They're quite happy to pocket twenty pounds from the majority who cough up unwittingly to the bullying jobsworths.

Where did I learn this from? From a friend who is a South West Trains employee no less!...........

 

[Acker79]

£28.50 to one station, £22.50 LESS to go further. Which ever way you look at it it is insane, either the conditions or the prices. If I explained this to a foreign visitor they would look at me in a strange way, and start doing that twirly finger thing on the temple of their head.

I would explain to them that there aren't many alternative ways to get to Eastleigh, other than car (a quick search of the national express coach and stage coach sites suggests neither stop there, a google search for 'london to eastleigh coach' doesn't provide any), and that there's a coach every 1.5 hours to southampton from london, therefore the train company has to compete with coaches for southampton customers in a way it doesn't for eastleigh customers, so has to lower prices for southampton, but can push the prices up for eastleigh.

There's also the factor that there are probably more southampton customers than there are eastleigh ones so they bump up the price to compensate, but I think it's more my first point - competition for customers.

 

[Southwick_Seagull]

Trains in this country are shit and over priced. As someone who uses them regularly to get to and from Uni I find it laughable that the government are trying to get people to cut down on their "carbon footprint" and use public transport and offer such a shoddy alternative. This case seems to be people having a common sense by-pass. Were they trying to break the rules? No. Were they trying to con the company out of money? No. Did they break the smallest of small print? Yes. Does this warrant a 100 quid fine? Of bloody course not.

 

[Gwylan]

South West Trains are one of the worst companies for inflated fare's & jobsworth inspectors. With Stagecoach as the parent company, this is to be expected. This story doesn't surprise me. I look forward to the day when the railways are re nationalised & run as a public service, not for the benefit of shareholders & fat cat managers.

How many passengers have ever been taken to court for refusing to pay a penalty fare by South West Trains & any other train company? Exactly ZERO! Why? Because the train companies know they're on dodgy legal ground & are scared of losing a test case in court. Yes, they'll send you lots of intimidating letters full of legal & threatening jargon that threaten you with all sorts of dire penalties. Keep ignoring their threat's & they'll give up. Its laughable when they threaten you with the magistrates court when the only legal recourse they have is through the small claims court. They will give up eventually. They're quite happy to pocket twenty pounds from the majority who cough up unwittingly to the bullying jobsworths.

....

Yes, like I said several pages back, this Eastleigh couple should have refused to pay and let SWT take them to court. I'm sure that the fine was legally dodgy.

There is another point about T&Cs though, how do you know what they are? I have a rail ticket in front of me bought from the ticket machines at Brighton station and it says "Validity - see restrictions". It then says further details can be obtained from the train operator's website. This seems total madness to me. Before setting off for the station that day, I should check the sites for the train operators that serve Brighton just to check what tickets were on offer? Total lunacy.

I never have - nor would most people. I did fall foul of it a few weeks ago when I travelled back from Victoria on the Gatwick Express. I thought that now that they went all the way to Brighton and they'd removed the special barriers, normal day returns could be used: the inspector told me that my ticket wasn't valid and could only be used on Southern and First Crapital. But there was nothing on my ticket that told me that nor was there anything on the machine. With a multiplicity of operators, how on earth is someone meant to memorise all the T&Cs?

 

[beorhthelm]

How many passengers have ever been taken to court for refusing to pay a penalty fare by South West Trains & any other train company? Exactly ZERO! Why? Because the train companies know they're on dodgy legal ground & are scared of losing a test case in court.
[...]
Where did I learn this from? From a friend who is a South West Trains employee no less!...........

im fairly sure that train fare evasion is a criminal offence, if so your friend is talking utter bollocks. what counts as evasion rather than cheeky wrong type of ticket is the sort of matter that is for a court to decide.

 

[clapham_gull]

no, but consumers do usually have the choice in their actions whether to abide by the contract or not. frankly if your getting an 80% discount ticket then you should consult the small print.

It's a train ticket, they will sell a limited amount at a much cheaper price.

The complete madness is the fact they are allowed to stipulate you can't leave the train when you want.

It makes our the way we operate the trains in this country a laughing stock.

 

[Pinkie Brown]

im fairly sure that train fare evasion is a criminal offence, if so your friend is talking utter bollocks. what counts as evasion rather than cheeky wrong type of ticket is the sort of matter that is for a court to decide.

Seeing as my friend works for the the revenue department in an admin role, I'm "fairly sure" he has an idea what he's talking about.

If the rail companies catch somebody who they believe is deliberately evading their fare, they won't issue a penalty fare, but simply take them to court. When somebody boards a train because the queue was too long, they were running late & they're unlucky enough to encounter a revenue protection goon who see's a window of chance to issue a ticket for whatever reason, chances are they'll just get hit with a penalty ticket.

Read & digest. Interesting stuff.

10 ways to avoid penalty fares on trains | News

 

[clapham_gull]

so your friend is talking utter bollocks....

 

[British Bulldog]

If you buy a ticket online you tick a box to accept the terms and conditions so ignorance is not an excuse.

You cant really argue with that.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Ignorantia lexus es non excusat, agreed. However, this is not a law to abide by. They are unreasonable terms and conditions and most on here seem to agree with that apart from employees of the railway.