Paul Corfield wrote:
I am also the person who spent a lot of time explaining the benefits of
gating and the business case issues to a wide range of TOCs as well as
the first private owners (Prism) of what is now C2C.

I don't see any bad side to 'gates', but the fact is the ones at Kings
Cross are inadequate. Now, I will accept your explanation for this
deficiency, but that doesn't change the fact that they may be narrower
- so you can have more gates - but they're slow and cause all sorts of
problems. Others have commented on how they're bad at accepting
tickets, especially Oyster cards.

There are many different suppliers of gates and
while Cubic have the biggest share of the market they are not without
competitors.

Sure, but I doubt First will change supplier for the roll-out on the
remainder of the Thameslink branch and Great Northern - based on what
they already use.

Gates are a good thing, for sure, and I can't wait to see them at ALL
stations - but if they're that easy to get around, then there's a
serious issue to be dealt with. The use of gates will be a possible
justification to reduce staffing, and/or physical ticket checks. So,
they should be much more successful at stopping fare evaders.

What we have is a situation where fare evasion is a piece of p**s (for
want of better words), which means they gates are almost there just to
validate Oyster cards, collect tickets from the ordinary passenger and
maybe regulate the flow! We queue, while the others just double up and
get through scot free. Something is fundamentally wrong here!

Jonathan

On 14 Jun 2006 04:21:55 -0700, "Jonathan Morris" wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
a 20 quid penalty every couple of weeks was
cheaper than a season ticket. It was even more "favourable" when the
PF used to be a tenner.

Even after the £20 introduction last year, a gripper 'caught' a guy in
a suit that had £20 in his hand and gave it over before the inspector
said a word. He'd clearly worked out that it was cheaper than a ticket
every day. Sadly, he's right to think it.

Well, that's what the threat of a £1,000 fine and a jail term is supposed to
counter. If you get caught once or twice, £20. However, more than that and
there should be prosecution and, on conviction, the appropriate sentence.

I suspect that the fine would be more than a yearly season ticket. And the
criminal record (including a possible stay with Her Majesty) might make suits
think twice about fare evasion.

But of course, since they're only fare-evaders they aren't interesting to the
criminal justice people.
--
Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com
|http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk or
|http://www.livejournal.com/users/chrishansenhome/

Christian Hansen wrote:
Well, that's what the threat of a £1,000 fine and a jail term is supposed to
counter. If you get caught once or twice, £20. However, more than that and
there should be prosecution and, on conviction, the appropriate sentence.

You'd need to keep detailed records to do this. I suspect it's easier
to dish out a penalty, earn your £1 commission and move on.

I suspect that the fine would be more than a yearly season ticket. And the
criminal record (including a possible stay with Her Majesty) might make suits
think twice about fare evasion.

If it happens, sure. However...

"..since they're only fare-evaders they aren't interesting to the
criminal justice people."

....shows why they shouldn't be too worried.

Fines for those who attend court are pathetic, going by the ones I've
seen published in local newspapers (from court). It probably costs the
TOC more than they ever get back, so penalties have become the standard
'punishment', which is in my opinion woefully inadequate as a
deterrant.

Jonathan

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
oups.com...
Jonathan Morris wrote:

Even after the £20 introduction last year, a gripper 'caught' a guy in
a suit that had £20 in his hand and gave it over before the inspector
said a word. He'd clearly worked out that it was cheaper than a ticket
every day. Sadly, he's right to think it.

Well, I do that all the time. I'm not attempting to evade fares but
there are times when paying the 20.00 is worth it for getting a train
when you only have 20s before the train leaves.

Why had this guy "clearly worked out .. " ? You can't know what he
was doing on his other journeys, or even if he made other journeys.

Incurring a Penalty Fare is not a criminal offence: it is simply the
cost of a ticket when purchased on-train.

At Sandy the other day, I intended to get the xx:36 but I got the time
wrong: it was actually xx:32 so I only had a few seconds to get the train.

As the train stops at the platform, I moved to the door where the grippeurs
were, explained that I just HAD to get THAT train and was happy to pay the
22.20.
(I said all this before boarding). They issued me a PF and I paid. There was
no animosity at all.

Richard [in SG19]



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Christian Hansen" wrote in
message

Well, that's what the threat of a £1,000 fine and a jail term is supposed
to
counter. If you get caught once or twice, £20. However, more than that and
there should be prosecution and, on conviction, the appropriate sentence.

Why so ? It's perfectly legal for someone to board a train ticket-less-ly
and pay the PF on every journey if they want to. There is no offence to
be prosecuted for !

Why do you use words such as "caught" ? There are only two possibilities:
a) you are suspected of FE, in which case you should be prosecuted
b) you simply board a train without a ticket, in which case the PF is the
only ticket
available to you.

There is no situation in which you can be prosecuted OR PF'd: the two are
mutually exclusive (for a particular jny)

Richard [in SG19]



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

MIG wrote:
No, the person with the £20 was showing evidence of deliberate
fare-evasion, and should have been prosecuted, risking a fine of £1000
or gaol or whatever is. Plenty of people have been prosecuted when
this sort of routine behaviour is observed.

Depends on the destination, on a train to London Bridge, for example,
means you'll pay when you get there as there are barriers on the way
out.

Most of this week a gripper has come through the 7:02 from High Brooms
to CHX, asking if anyone needs a ticket (not asking to check tickets
though). He wasn't there today.

"Christian Hansen" wrote in
message ...
On 14 Jun 2006 04:21:55 -0700, "Jonathan Morris"
wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
a 20 quid penalty every couple of weeks was
cheaper than a season ticket. It was even more "favourable" when the
PF used to be a tenner.

Even after the £20 introduction last year, a gripper 'caught' a guy in
a suit that had £20 in his hand and gave it over before the inspector
said a word. He'd clearly worked out that it was cheaper than a ticket
every day. Sadly, he's right to think it.

Well, that's what the threat of a £1,000 fine and a jail term is supposed
to
counter. If you get caught once or twice, £20. However, more than that and
there should be prosecution and, on conviction, the appropriate sentence.

I suspect that the fine would be more than a yearly season ticket. And the
criminal record (including a possible stay with Her Majesty) might make
suits
think twice about fare evasion.

But of course, since they're only fare-evaders they aren't interesting to
the
criminal justice people.

Thousands of poeple are prosecuted every year for fare evasion. It is now
handled as a private prosecution by London Transport thereby bypassing the
Crown Prosecution Service, which did indeed use to drag its feet on such
matters.

"Jonathan Morris" wrote in message
oups.com...
Christian Hansen wrote:


You'd need to keep detailed records to do this. I suspect it's easier
to dish out a penalty, earn your £1 commission and move on.

Is there really a £1 commission on penalty fares?

It probably costs the
TOC more than they ever get back, so penalties have become the standard
'punishment', which is in my opinion woefully inadequate as a
deterrant.

I saw two results from the City of London court two days ago for London
Underground.

Case 1 was £300 fine, £100 costs and £3.00 compensation. £403 in all.
Case 2 was £330 fine, £100 costs and £3.00 compensation. £433 in all.

Alan OBrien wrote:
Is there really a £1 commission on penalty fares?

I can't speak for all TOCs but Wagn paid 5% on all ticket
sales/penalties issued. I presume First have continued this.

I saw two results from the City of London court two days ago for London
Underground.

Case 1 was £300 fine, £100 costs and £3.00 compensation. £403 in all.
Case 2 was £330 fine, £100 costs and £3.00 compensation. £433 in all.

Wow, that's far more impressive than Wagn were getting in
Hertfordshire, although the later message in this thread might explain
why.

Jonathan

Richard M Willis wrote:
Why had this guy "clearly worked out .. " ? You can't know what he
was doing on his other journeys, or even if he made other journeys.

There are loads of things in life where you can say "I didn't expect
that" or someone surprises you.. but the fact he had a smirk on his
face, and just handed over the £20 before anyone had said a word
suggests he might have done it before. How else would he have known it
was a £20 penalty? Maybe he saw a poster, or maybe not.

People who can't get a ticket (and I've seen a situation where someone
has stepped on a train, asked the inspector *when the doors were still
open* if he would sell a ticket and STILL been penalty fared once the
doors shut) usually argue or say SOMETHING. This is why I conclude it
has happened before. Maybe I am wrong, but it isn't unique.

On my line, the vast majority of fare evaders are still of the chav
variety (and in groups, inspectors will leave them alone unless backed
up by police) that probably don't even know what a ticket machine looks
like! Hatfield has now closed the side access door, but that hardly
forces them to stop at the ticket window before boarding!

Incurring a Penalty Fare is not a criminal offence: it is simply the
cost of a ticket when purchased on-train.

Indeed, which is why it's the easy option for TOCs. However, it's
pretty obvious that this person (or others like him, if you're so sure
he's innocent) is intentionally fare evading. I doubt he is likely to
be hunting down a member of staff at his destination, and Kings Cross
will ALWAYS be able to sell you a ticket - there's a manned office 24
hours a day!!

As the train stops at the platform, I moved to the door where the grippeurs
were, explained that I just HAD to get THAT train and was happy to pay the
22.20.
(I said all this before boarding). They issued me a PF and I paid. There was
no animosity at all.

I have no problem with that. I've boarded HEX in a hurry and not only
had to pay the surcharge but also lose my railcard discount. It's still
cheeky that they PF'd you (see my comment above about a similar
situation) when you were perfectly open about it. I guess they figured
that you might do this regularly and bank on there NOT being someone.

Do you buy a ticket at your destination or consider yourself lucky when
there isn't anyone on the train doing a check? That decides if you're a
fare evader or not, especially as the conditions of travel on FCC say
you must buy a ticket in advance or a permit to travel. Otherwise
you're effectively tresspassing!

Jonathan