Fare-dodging has become normalised, say rail staff
Fare-dodging has become normalised and is viewed as a 'victimless crime', rail staff have said.
A report by the Office of Road and Rail (ORR) found rail staff were struggling to cope with growing levels of intentional fare-dodging.
While the report was commissioned to examine concerns that some passengers had been unfairly pursued by train companies over genuine mistakes when buying tickets, it said: 'Rail staff we spoke to described how fare evasion is becoming normalised among certain passenger groups and increasingly more challenging to tackle.'
The report added: 'As well as occasional opportunistic fare evaders, there are some individuals who use a range of techniques to persistently underpay and avoid their fares.'
Staff reported being met with 'aggressive and abusive behaviour' when trying to check the tickets of fare-dodgers. The report added: 'Some fare evaders consider that it is a victimless crime and are either not aware of or are undeterred by the consequences of being caught.'
Fare-dodging costs the industry hundreds of millions of pounds each year, which can lead to higher ticket prices.
The findings come after Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, visited Stratford Station in east London to personally confront fare-dodgers last week.
Writing in The Telegraph, the Conservative MP said: 'I watched as people flooded through an empty barrier, while the enforcement officer was on his backside, feet up, watching on. It was a perfect encapsulation of broken Britain.
'For ordinary hard-working citizens travelling into work on their morning commute, the sight of somebody slipping through the barriers without paying is a slap in the face.'
Speaking last night, Mr Jenrick said: 'Fare-dodging is out of control right now. It's not just a problem in London, it's happening right across the country.
'Unless the authorities crack down on lesser offences, lawbreaking will spiral further out of control.'
While the ORR report detailed the industry's struggles to tackle deliberate fare evasion, the report was in fact commissioned to examine cases where train companies over-zealously prosecuted passengers who had accidentally bought the wrong ticket.
The regulator called for more consistency in dealing with honest mistakes. Stephanie Tobyn, the ORR's director of strategy, said rules were 'weighted towards industry' when dealing with passengers who had made a genuine error.
It said ticket-buying should be simpler and have clear routes and time restrictions, while companies should focus on intentional criminal evasion. Prosecutions should only proceed in the public interest and should be decided consistently across train companies, the report added.
A spokesman for the Rail Delivery Group, which represents train companies, said: 'We need to strike the right balance addressing genuine, honest mistakes made by customers and taking firm action against those who deliberately and persistently seek to exploit the system.'
Lord Hendy, the rail minister, said: 'Deliberate fare-dodging costs the taxpayer up to £400m annually – money which could be better spent on improving passenger experience – and must be dealt with, but ham-fisted prosecutions that punish people who have made an innocent mistake is not the way to do this.
'We will look at this report in detail and set out what we'll be doing to address the issues raised in due course.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
31 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Canada's Pierre Poilievre Should Step Aside
Canada's Pierre Poilievre is back after an election loss for the ages. The Conservative Party leader won a by-election on Monday in Battle River-Crowfoot, a Tory electoral district in Alberta that he's never lived in. He can finally return to Parliament after the embarrassment of losing his own seat of Carleton in Ottawa during the federal election in April, which saw the Conservatives blow a more than 20-point lead to a Liberal Party led by former central banker Mark Carney. Poilievre won his by-election with 80% of the vote. A casual observer might assume there may be few demanding Poilievre quit as Tory leader with such a healthy margin, mistaking a single parliamentary district for the country—or the party. That's a fair enough mistake. Some folks, including me, were making the case only months ago for him to stay on. After all, the Conservatives had managed a strong general election performance with 41% of the vote, but were punished by first-past-the-post. Poilievre was a steady hand who just had to wait for the Liberals to implode, which they would, eventually, as all Liberals do in time. April gave way to May and June, and as summer settled in, the Liberals remained atop the polls as Carney continued to wrong-foot the Conservatives by giving them just about everything they wanted. There was something of a Greek tragedy to it, with Poilievre getting his way—the end of the unpopular carbon tax, lower taxes, lower internal trade barriers, and a government that was all-in on building big, national infrastructure projects. When Air Canada flight attendants went on strike in recent days, Carney's labor minister asked the Canada Industrial Relations Board to order them back to work, a move one might have expected from Poilievre. Critics have been asking whether, with Liberals like these, one even needs Conservatives, or ones like Poilievre, at least. Read More: Pierre Poilievre Is the Ron DeSantis of Canada In January, Poilievre faces a leadership review, and now's the time to ask if he should stay on. Increasingly, the answer is no. Of course, he won his by-election with ease. But it's one of the safest Tory seats in Canada, and was vacated by Damien Kurek, who stepped aside so his leader could waltz back into office. It was a move that undermined Poilievre's leadership even as it affirmed it, having to contest a tap-in putt of a district when months earlier he seemed a shoo-in for Prime Minister. Since April, Poilievre has been unable to make up ground against Carney's Liberals. A big problem for the Conservative leader is that when voters meet him, when they get to know him, they don't like him, which puts his party at a structural disadvantage. The Angus Reid Institute's Poilievre monitor finds the Conservative leader's unfavorability numbers persistently high. Going back to the fall of 2022, over 50% of those surveyed disliked Poilievre. That number never got better than 49%, and now sits at 57%. His numbers are particularly dismal among women and younger voters, but even among the 55+ age bracket that traditionally votes Conservative, Poilievre manages just 39% approval. What's more, during the last federal election, where leadership was a constant theme amid the unprecedented threats from President Donald Trump to make Canada the '51st state' and impose devastating tariffs, Carney outpaced Poilievre on likability and governance qualities. In July, Abacus Data found that Carney still beat Poilievre on key leadership metrics, an advantage that, should it hold, could help the Liberals eventually turn their parliamentary minority into a majority. Read More: How Canada Got Hooked on the U.S. Economy Poilievre said in July 'every election comes with lessons.' But his tone never shifted. He remained the same doctrinaire culture warrior. In August, Poilievre attacked Canada's electric vehicle mandate, calling it 'Carney's tax' in a move reminiscent of his party's 'axe the tax' battle against carbon pricing. The play comes as Trump takes on California's EV mandate. But the focus makes Poilievre look too close to Trump and risks backfiring if Carney goes ahead and once again ditches a Justin Trudeau-era policy. Perhaps the most damning thing you can say about Poilievre is he's become redundant. He's a less capable, less experienced, less likable iteration of a business Liberal committed to low taxes, a lean regulatory regime, and infrastructure and resource development. Read More: How Trump Revived Canada's Liberals The Conservatives could do with a reset—a return to the drawing board. They need a likable leader who at the very least seems like they have the capacity to touch grass from time to time. The odds are that the Liberals, now nearly 10 years in power, will do themselves in, as all governments do. But Poilievre has proven that he's unwilling or unable to adapt to a political moment that's different from the advantageous one his party enjoyed before Trump and tariffs. For that reason alone, there's good cause for the Conservatives to ditch Poilievre sooner than later. Come January, if the party hasn't managed better fortunes, some Conservatives might try to do just that.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Corporate America is silent as Trump abandons free-market principles
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow A version of this story appeared in CNN Business' Nightcap newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. Not long ago, American conservative orthodoxy held that when it comes to doing business, the government that governs least governs best. The orthodoxy manifested itself in familiar ways. Groups that claimed the mantle of individual liberties would decry new legislation. Talk radio and podcasts would mock unnamed bureaucrats for ham-fisted overreach. And powerful business lobbies were quick to denounce — in press releases and even lawsuits — regulations or taxes they saw as government overreach. But when faced with President Donald Trump's efforts to seize control of private enterprise — such as his recent arrangement to have the US pocket a portion of Nvidia's sales to China, his social media outbursts at individual executives, his moves to take a stake in Intel, and his use of executive powers to cajole banks and law firms he perceives as insufficiently loyal — those same groups have gone quiet. Take the US Chamber of Commerce, the largest business advocacy group in the country. Last year, the Chamber sued a federal consumer watchdog group for attempting to cap credit card late fees at $8 a month, claiming the agency 'exceeded its statutory authority.' In 2023, it sued the Biden administration over provisions for Medicare price negotiations in the Inflation Reduction Act, claiming the move would consolidate 'unfettered and unchecked power' to the department of Health and Human Services. But under Trump's second term, the Chamber has had little to say publicly about Trump's aggressive meddling in the private sector. Similarly, the Business Roundtable, another DC-based lobbying group that represents hundreds of chief executives, has rarely been shy about denouncing what it sees as presidential overreach in the form of taxes and environmental regulations. This year, though, the group has been largely MIA on the MAGA shift toward a style of capitalism that more closely resembles the autocratic regimes of Russia and China. Both groups have criticized Trump's trade war, warning that tariffs hurt American businesses. But neither has spoken out about the president's more direct assault on free enterprise. Neither the Chamber of Commerce nor the Business Roundtable responded to multiple requests for comment. The president, a self-styled dealmaker, has thrown out the standard free-market playbook in ways that have alarmed lawmakers, investors and legal experts. And suddenly, the legal protections businesses have long counted on appear shaky, said Philip M. Nichols, a professor of legal studies and business ethics at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'Any business that sticks its head up, or any business person that sticks their head up, is taking a risk that can't be calculated,' Nichols said in an interview. 'What's the smart thing to do — what do the wildebeest do when they get to the crocodile-infected river? They wait for the other wildebeest to jump in, and then follow.' Several trade groups have privately drafted plans to push back against the Trump administration in defense of their business interests, people familiar with the matter told CNN. But those plans were shelved at the request of members that are worried about drawing White House ire. 'There's an 'Eye of Sauron' element here that everyone is very aware of,' one manufacturing CEO told CNN, referring to the 'Lord of the Rings' character that brought all subjects to heel. 'But there's also a recognition that this is an administration that is transactional if they believe you're on board with their agenda.' When it comes to exerting his influence over Corporate America, no matter appears too small or too large for Trump's input. Last month, the president took credit for Coca-Cola's decision to roll out a cane-sugar-sweetened product that aligns with his allies' 'Make America Healthy Again' philosophy. He regularly criticizes CEOs in public for perceived slights, demanded that Intel's boss resign over unspecified conflicts, and urged Goldman Sachs to fire its top economist after the bank said tariffs would raise consumer prices (a fact virtually all economists agree to be true, and which we are now seeing borne out in reality). While much of that bluster is run-of-the-mill Trump rhetoric, the president shocked trade experts when he announced an unorthodox (and potentially illegal) arrangement with chipmakers Nvidia and AMD earlier this month. In exchange for export licenses that allow them to sell their products in China, the companies agreed to funnel 15% of their China sales to the US government — a setup that some analysts called a 'shakedown' of private enterprise. The White House's push into private businesses took another turn Tuesday when officials confirmed the administration was considering using taxpayer money to acquire a stake in struggling chipmaker Intel. The primary reason for such a move, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said, was the president's desire to reduce US dependence on Taiwan for chip production. But he also said Trump believes the government should have 'equity' in tech giants. The silence from Corporate America to Trump's incursion into private businesses isn't entirely unexpected. Businesses have lost their appetite for the kind of socially progressive rhetoric many adopted in response to the 2020 murder of George Floyd. At the same time, Trump's return to the White House came with a cost-benefit analysis for any business leaders thinking of speaking out: Make yourself a target, or fall in line and wait for the massive tax cuts the president has promised. 'Corporate citizens are harmed just like flesh and blood citizens are harmed when you have a leader who… actively seeks to monetize public office and actively seeks to use the power of the presidency to harm perceived enemies or anyone who doesn't appropriately capitulate,' Donald Sherman, executive director of the Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told CNN. 'In some ways, this is the natural and predictable result of failing to appropriately stand up to President Trump's anti-democratic and authoritarian tendencies during his first term.'
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
Corporate America is silent as Trump abandons free-market principles
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow A version of this story appeared in CNN Business' Nightcap newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. Not long ago, American conservative orthodoxy held that when it comes to doing business, the government that governs least governs best. The orthodoxy manifested itself in familiar ways. Groups that claimed the mantle of individual liberties would decry new legislation. Talk radio and podcasts would mock unnamed bureaucrats for ham-fisted overreach. And powerful business lobbies were quick to denounce — in press releases and even lawsuits — regulations or taxes they saw as government overreach. But when faced with President Donald Trump's efforts to seize control of private enterprise — such as his recent arrangement to have the US pocket a portion of Nvidia's sales to China, his social media outbursts at individual executives, his moves to take a stake in Intel, and his use of executive powers to cajole banks and law firms he perceives as insufficiently loyal — those same groups have gone quiet. Take the US Chamber of Commerce, the largest business advocacy group in the country. Last year, the Chamber sued a federal consumer watchdog group for attempting to cap credit card late fees at $8 a month, claiming the agency 'exceeded its statutory authority.' In 2023, it sued the Biden administration over provisions for Medicare price negotiations in the Inflation Reduction Act, claiming the move would consolidate 'unfettered and unchecked power' to the department of Health and Human Services. But under Trump's second term, the Chamber has had little to say publicly about Trump's aggressive meddling in the private sector. Similarly, the Business Roundtable, another DC-based lobbying group that represents hundreds of chief executives, has rarely been shy about denouncing what it sees as presidential overreach in the form of taxes and environmental regulations. This year, though, the group has been largely MIA on the MAGA shift toward a style of capitalism that more closely resembles the autocratic regimes of Russia and China. Both groups have criticized Trump's trade war, warning that tariffs hurt American businesses. But neither has spoken out about the president's more direct assault on free enterprise. Neither the Chamber of Commerce nor the Business Roundtable responded to multiple requests for comment. The president, a self-styled dealmaker, has thrown out the standard free-market playbook in ways that have alarmed lawmakers, investors and legal experts. And suddenly, the legal protections businesses have long counted on appear shaky, said Philip M. Nichols, a professor of legal studies and business ethics at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'Any business that sticks its head up, or any business person that sticks their head up, is taking a risk that can't be calculated,' Nichols said in an interview. 'What's the smart thing to do — what do the wildebeest do when they get to the crocodile-infected river? They wait for the other wildebeest to jump in, and then follow.' Several trade groups have privately drafted plans to push back against the Trump administration in defense of their business interests, people familiar with the matter told CNN. But those plans were shelved at the request of members that are worried about drawing White House ire. 'There's an 'Eye of Sauron' element here that everyone is very aware of,' one manufacturing CEO told CNN, referring to the 'Lord of the Rings' character that brought all subjects to heel. 'But there's also a recognition that this is an administration that is transactional if they believe you're on board with their agenda.' When it comes to exerting his influence over Corporate America, no matter appears too small or too large for Trump's input. Last month, the president took credit for Coca-Cola's decision to roll out a cane-sugar-sweetened product that aligns with his allies' 'Make America Healthy Again' philosophy. He regularly criticizes CEOs in public for perceived slights, demanded that Intel's boss resign over unspecified conflicts, and urged Goldman Sachs to fire its top economist after the bank said tariffs would raise consumer prices (a fact virtually all economists agree to be true, and which we are now seeing borne out in reality). While much of that bluster is run-of-the-mill Trump rhetoric, the president shocked trade experts when he announced an unorthodox (and potentially illegal) arrangement with chipmakers Nvidia and AMD earlier this month. In exchange for export licenses that allow them to sell their products in China, the companies agreed to funnel 15% of their China sales to the US government — a setup that some analysts called a 'shakedown' of private enterprise. The White House's push into private businesses took another turn Tuesday when officials confirmed the administration was considering using taxpayer money to acquire a stake in struggling chipmaker Intel. The primary reason for such a move, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said, was the president's desire to reduce US dependence on Taiwan for chip production. But he also said Trump believes the government should have 'equity' in tech giants. The silence from Corporate America to Trump's incursion into private businesses isn't entirely unexpected. Businesses have lost their appetite for the kind of socially progressive rhetoric many adopted in response to the 2020 murder of George Floyd. At the same time, Trump's return to the White House came with a cost-benefit analysis for any business leaders thinking of speaking out: Make yourself a target, or fall in line and wait for the massive tax cuts the president has promised. 'Corporate citizens are harmed just like flesh and blood citizens are harmed when you have a leader who… actively seeks to monetize public office and actively seeks to use the power of the presidency to harm perceived enemies or anyone who doesn't appropriately capitulate,' Donald Sherman, executive director of the Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told CNN. 'In some ways, this is the natural and predictable result of failing to appropriately stand up to President Trump's anti-democratic and authoritarian tendencies during his first term.'
