Student travel

student_parent

I wanted to alert all students and parents to the pitfalls you can fall into traveling on Virgin Trains following my student son's experience.

He recently got fined £139 for traveling with only the photocard part of the student railcard as nobody had told him you needed both parts of the card for it to be valid.

This was a big blow as I had just persuaded him of benefits of saving money on the train compared to using a car when in fact the reverse was true.

the ticket checkers seem very heavy handed.Then to make matters worse the next time he travelled he got on the wrong train by mistake as there were three waiting marked with the same destination.He was then told to leave the train and had to pay £60 fare to get home.

In both cases this seems unfair as he had paid for a ticket and thought he was doing the right thing.So please take extra special care to ensure they are on the right train and have all the necessary bits of paper as otherwise it could cost you dear.

Young people do seem to be treated worse in these situations and he felt like a criminal .Recently the same thing happened to me on a southern train and I had caught a later train but the guard allowed me to travel as I had a ticket for that route.

gilbert_and_sullivan

It comes under the ''little bit of power and by God we're going to enjoy it'' heading.

wealdroam

So he travelled with a railcard discounted ticket but without the railcard?
Is that right?

Their T&Cs state...

Railcards purchased online will incorporate your photograph. If you have a Railcard that does not incorporate your photograph, you must carry a separate 16-25 Photocard (or where appropriate a ‘Permit to travel without Photocard’) and you must present this in any circumstance where you present your Railcard (buying tickets or travelling with reduced priced tickets).

and...

You must carry your Railcard with you on your journey and when asked by rail staff, you must show a valid ticket and valid Railcard. If you fail to do so, you will be required to pay the full price Standard Single fare for your journey as if no ticket was purchased before starting the journey and in some cases a Penalty Fare.

Why single out Virgin Trains?

I really don't think the action taken by staff would've been any different with any other train company.


This is a photocard...
Note the word PHOTOCARD on it.



This is a railcard...

yorkie2

student_parent wrote: »

I wanted to alert all students and parents to the pitfalls you can fall into traveling on Virgin Trains following my student son's experience.

That applies to any rail company (though some may be more likely to 'show discretion' than others).

An alert has already been issued by Watchdog, watch the video from 02:55 to 04:00.

student_parent wrote: »

He recently got fined £139 for traveling with only the photocard part of the student railcard as nobody had told him you needed both parts of the card for it to be valid.

No, he did not get fined. £139 is a fare. An extortionate fare, and I don't agree with it, but a fare nevertheless. And the T&Cs state both portions are required.

student_parent wrote: »

This was a big blow as I had just persuaded him of benefits of saving money on the train compared to using a car when in fact the reverse was true.

Not quite true! In both cases it can be costly if you make a mistake, e.g. a mistake with insurance or driving license could be costly...

student_parent wrote: »

the ticket checkers seem very heavy handed.Then to make matters worse the next time he travelled he got on the wrong train by mistake as there were three waiting marked with the same destination.He was then told to leave the train and had to pay £60 fare to get home.

Impossible to advise without full information.

student_parent wrote: »

In both cases this seems unfair as he had paid for a ticket and thought he was doing the right thing.So please take extra special care to ensure they are on the right train and have all the necessary bits of paper as otherwise it could cost you dear.

Agreed.

student_parent wrote: »

Young people do seem to be treated worse in these situations and he felt like a criminal .Recently the same thing happened to me on a southern train and I had caught a later train but the guard allowed me to travel as I had a ticket for that route.

If he had been treated like a criminal he'd have been taken to court, not charged a fare. But, I agree, the 'punishments' are harsh. This has recently been debated on Railforums, in a topic titled Is it fair that Advance tickets have no value when the train is missed? I believe it would be fairer to charge an admin fee (£10) plus the difference between the fare paid and the Anytime fare due.

The current rules are too harsh I believe, as they take no account of the fare due.

cityflier82

I bet Yorkie is a railwayman who insists on sticking to T&Cs whcn customers make genuine mistakes. Take season ticket holders. If they forget their pass, some rail operators allow them to claim the refund of the daily ticket they had to buy if sending it in along with a copy of their season ticket. I found out about this last year when I held an annual First season from Coventry to Euston, forgot my pass one day and was told I could claim back the cost of the £107 daily ticket which I later did from Virgin.

So why do season ticket holders get treated differently from railcard holders who make genuine mistakes? Rail operators should target fare evasion - Virgin, in particular, don't give a damn about protecting their revenue in places such as the West Midlands.

thelawnet

gilbert_and_sullivan wrote: »

It comes under the ''little bit of power and by God we're going to enjoy it'' heading.

I was watching a ticket inspector the other day, woman had return ticket from wherever to wherever, she still had the outbound but had lost the return ticket, ticket inspector made her by a new one while the woman sat their sobbing (not sure why, it wasn't expensive and she looked like she could afford it, maybe she just had a bad day).

dmg24

thelawnet wrote: »

I was watching a ticket inspector the other day, woman had return ticket from wherever to wherever, she still had the outbound but had lost the return ticket, ticket inspector made her by a new one while the woman sat their sobbing (not sure why, it wasn't expensive and she looked like she could afford it, maybe she just had a bad day).

I don't see the issue - the outbound ticket means nothing if you are on the return journey, hence she needed to pay!

TwistedPsycho

thelawnet wrote: »

I was watching a ticket inspector the other day, woman had return ticket from wherever to wherever, she still had the outbound but had lost the return ticket, ticket inspector made her by a new one while the woman sat their sobbing (not sure why, it wasn't expensive and she looked like she could afford it, maybe she just had a bad day).

or it could be that the woman in question had already used the return portion once (some returns are valid for up to a month) or never had a valid ticket in the first place; and was sobbing in the hope that the ticket inspector would take pity on her.

It amazes me how people seem to think that the railway is immune to "customers" trying to cover their tracks. A police officer would undoubted be able to recall times when someone has tried to get out of being arrested by crying and balling in an attempt to not get arrested; a shop keeper will probably be able to recall someone turning on the waterworks because they were caught stealing beer from a store because "they are skint and don't get their dole money until the morning, please don't call the police".....

I can even recall a daily commuter who was taken to court for presenting a dodgy bank card to pay for a penalty fare on board a train. He sobbed that he was in a messy divorce and his wife must have blocked access to their joint bank account. It was only on being taken to court that he realised that he had already been sussed and there were 8 charges made over a one month period and evidence was presented that he had been doing it for many months, if not years.


and yes. I work for the railway.

thelawnet

TwistedPsycho wrote: »

or it could be that the woman in question had already used the return portion once (some returns are valid for up to a month) or never had a valid ticket in the first place; and was sobbing in the hope that the ticket inspector would take pity on her.

It was a day return.

TwistedPsycho

and you know for a fact that she had not used it to travel earlier in the day and managed to use the outward bit a second time?

Like I said, rail travellers DO use that excuse and it will get worse now the McNulty Report has recommended massively increasing the cost of off-peak tickets at the expense of giving peak time travellers a break.

wealdroam

thelawnet wrote: »

It was a day return.

Well maybe someone else was using the return portion... on the same train even.