Fare dodger barges his way through barriers - and straight into arms of police
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
A fare dodger tried to make a run for it when he was confronted about his declined payment.
Fare dodging continues to make headlines – and not only because of the bizarre vigilante stunt by the shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick trying to catch them himself.
Cracking down on fare dodging is expensive for Transport for London, and it continues to flare up emotions as paying commuters shell out chunks of their income on travel.
One suspected fare evader was caught in action at Kingston station, which is a hotspot for fare dodging.
The man was snatched at the ticket barriers when he tried to use a card to tap out after he said his 'card doesn't work.'
The standoff was captured on the upcoming episode of Channel 5 series 'Fare Dodgers: At War With the Law,' which airs on Monday.
Jane, a South Western Railway revenue protection officer, beckons him to tap out after he said he had put money on the card.
'It doesn't work, that's what I'm trying to tell you,' he responds after claiming that 'the guy let me through at Clapham Junction.'
Jane says that it is 'because it has been blocked by the issuer.'
When he taps his card, it was declined.
He then bursts through the barrier – but directly into the arms of police officers standing by the gates.
Three officers have a tussle with him as he swings his arms, swears and spits, while Jane appears unfazed by his behaviour.
The man eventually paid, and his case was closed. The police took no further action on the assault.
The latest confrontation comes after a string of fare evaders have been caught on camera.
One man claimed he had used a card his friend gave him after racking up £3,500 in unpaid fares.
An investigation revealed the card had no money on it, but he was able to push the barriers open on his way to and from work.
A brazen 'short farer' evaded paying £20,000 over three years before he was caught.
The man avoided paying £35 for his commute from Surrey to London Waterloo by buying a ticket only from Vauxhall to Waterloo.
He also had a 16-17 Saver Railcard, which gives a 50% discount on tickets, despite not being eligible for one.
Jenrick, a minister under the previous Tory government, shared a video last week showing him running up to suspected fare dodgers at Stratford station in east London. More Trending
In one clip, he walks a man to the enforcement staff, who then politely ask him to step aside so they can deal with it.
One suspected fare evader tells him to 'f*** off,' while another allegedly told him he was carrying a knife.
It later emerged that Jenrick may not have had permission from TfL to film on station property, according to LBC.
The next episodes of Fare Dodgers: At War with the Law on Channel 5 air at 7pm on Wednesday, June 4, and at 9pm on Monday, June 2, on TV and on the streaming platform.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: 'Eurostar of Scotland' launches new London service spanning 353 miles and 11 stops
MORE: First picture of 'loving' teenager who died after motorbike plunged into canal
MORE: The drug behind double death in London that's '500 times more powerful than heroin'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
39 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Labour's muddled message
Photo by Peter Byrne -. Rachel Reeves is not where she wanted to be. When the Chancellor announced winter fuel payment cuts almost a year ago they were designed to advertise her strength. In order to restore economic stability, ran the narrative, Reeves would venture where previous governments feared to tread (David Cameron repeatedly rejected Tory demands to means-test pensioner benefits). Wonks applauded her taboo-busting. Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, whose book, Follow the Money, Reeves is fond of, praised the move as 'sensible'. The aim, No 11 said at the time, was to display discipline not just to the bond market but to voters (who often doubt Labour's economic competence). Yet now, as Reeves' slow-motion U-turn continues, she is advertising her weakness. A government that has held office for less than a year and that has a majority of 165 seats has proved incapable of making a cut worth just 0.05 per cent of GDP (£1.4bn). The new assertion from No 10 is that an improving economy – growth of 0.7 per cent in the first quarter – has made such munificence possible. Keir Starmer doesn't quite channel Ronald Reagan by declaring that it is 'morning again in Britain' but the suggestion is that the country is turning a corner – with four interest rate cuts and three trade deals. The problem is how grim the situation remains. Debt, as Treasury aides continually point out, stands at 95.5 per cent of GDP (0.7 per cent higher than a year ago). Here is why Reeves is imposing real-terms spending cuts on unprotected departments (Angela Rayner and Yvette Cooper, defending housing and the police respectively, have yet to settle with the Chancellor). During a press conference yesterday, Reeves conceded that there were 'good things I've had to say no to'. But as a consequence, Labour critics complain, the government's message is muddled. After entering office it promised short-term pain for long-term gain. 'Things will get worse before they get better,' warned Starmer. 'If we cannot afford it, we cannot do it,' declared Reeves (an inversion of JM Keynes' 'anything we can actually do, we can afford'). Some, including cabinet ministers, were sceptical of this strategy from the start, fearing that it would fail to resonate with an austerity-weary electorate that craved hope, not despair. But it was at least coherent. It pointed towards several tax-raising Budgets and fiscal restraint before a midterm or pre-election loosening. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Yet now the government finds itself in a political no-man's land. It can find the money to U-turn on winter fuel payment cuts, to (most likely) abolish the two-child benefit limit and to keep its election tax pledges. But it cannot find the money to prevent renewed departmental cuts and to commit to spending 3 per cent of GDP on defence (even as Starmer speaks of the UK moving to 'war-fighting readiness'). Voters could be forgiven for being confused, and almost certainly are. Reeves will have to use this autumn's Budget to raise taxes – the only question is by how much. One former aide to Gordon Brown notes the 'madness of spending lots at the start and less at the end of a parliament'. Some in Labour believe Reeves' defining error will prove to be her refusal to increase income tax, VAT or National Insurance on employees ('that's the original sin as far as I'm concerned,' says one source). This has left the government reliant on small but often fraught revenue raisers (such as higher inheritance tax on farmers). But there's a bigger challenge for Reeves: what kind of Chancellor does she ultimately want to be? She could have been the 'Iron Chancellor' – refusing to yield on her tough choices (such as winter fuel cuts). Or she could have been the 'anti-austerity Chancellor' – raising taxes to prevent renewed cuts. Or she could have been the 'growth Chancellor' – taking big risks for big rewards. In practice, Reeves has been all of these at various points without ever settling on an identity. The Chancellor herself defines her approach as 'balanced'. But the risk is that voters simply see it as incoherent. This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here [See also: Can John Healey really afford to go to war?] Related
Sky News
43 minutes ago
- Sky News
Kemi Badenoch to launch review into ECHR exit
Kemi Badenoch is to launch a review into whether the UK should leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) - and set out plans to revive a Rwanda-style deportation scheme. In a speech on Friday, the Conservative leader will announce a commission into how lawyers could be prevented from using international legislation to block government decisions on immigration. She will also announce plans to prevent people who arrive by small boat from claiming asylum and deport them to a third country. It is unclear if this would be Rwanda or another location. One of Labour's first acts in government was to scrap the Tories' Rwanda scheme, which would have deported illegal immigrations to the African nation for them to claim asylum there. The plan was held up by a series of legal challenges and ultimately failed to get off the ground before the election, despite around £700m being spent on it, according to the Home Office. The saga sparked a debate within the Tory party about whether the UK would need to leave the ECHR, which was established after the Second World War and sets out the rights and freedoms of people in the 46 countries signed up to it. During the Conservative leadership race, Ms Badenoch said leaving the ECHR wasn't a "silver bullet" and "not even the most radical thing that we probably will have to do" to control immigration. It put her at odds with her rival Robert Jenrick, now the shadow justice secretary, who claimed the Tories would "die" if they did not back exiting the ECHR. 19:32 Ms Badenoch's commission will be chaired by Tory peer and former justice minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar, the shadow attorney general. A Conservative Party aide close to the detail said: "Kemi has worked hard to bring the shadow cabinet together on this very difficult issue. "She has always said she will take her time to build a proper, workable plan to tackle the issue of the courts subverting parliamentary democracy. This commission, led by the brilliant lawyer Lord Wolfson, will make sure we're ready to take the tough decisions." Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, who has enjoyed a meteoric rise in the polls since the general election, has also said he would leave the ECHR. Labour's policy is to remain in it, but to bring forward legislation to "ensure it is the government and parliament that decides who should have the right to remain in the UK". According to the immigration white paper unveiled last month, this would address cases where Article 8 right to family life legal arguments have been used to frustrate deportation, often in the case of foreign criminals. Article 8 was also used in the case of a Palestinian family fleeing Gaza after they applied to enter the UK through a Ukrainian refugee scheme. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told the Home Affairs Select Committee on Tuesday that family migration has become "so complex" that courts are applying "exceptional" human rights guarantees to about a third of cases. She said: "The proportion of decisions being taken as exceptional - often under interpretations around Article 8 - end up being about 30 percent of the cases. That is not exceptional, that is a much broader proportion." However, she rejected calls to disapply the ECHR, saying compliance with international law has helped the government strike deals with France and Germany to help crack down on criminal gangs. She said the government will draw up a "clear framework" that will be "much easier for the courts to interpret and will reflect what the public want to see".
Metro
an hour ago
- Metro
Have you got nudes? What tourists need to know before going on holiday to the US
Thinking of visiting the US? You might want to delete the nudes on your camera roll before you go — that's if you don't want a border control officer looking at them, anyway. Under Trump's recent 'enhanced vetting' executive order, travellers are being reminded that border agents can – and do – search phones and laptops. Scrutiny is ramping up big time at the US border, with some being denied entry and even detained due to their digital content. On Wednesday, the US president resurrected a controversial travel ban from his first term in the White House: a proclamation that bans citizens of 12 countries from entering the United States. It's not something any of us want to think about before a holiday, but if you are stopped by a border agent, what are your rights? And do you have to hand your phone over? Metro asked the experts. Fuel your wanderlust with our curated newsletter of travel deals, guides and inspiration. Sign up here. Yes, and they don't need a warrant to do so. CBP agents have the legal authority to search electronic devices at the border: that's phones, laptops and tablets. This includes reviewing text messages, social media activity, photos, emails and even your browser history. In March, an unnamed French scientist was denied entry to the States after airport immigration officers searched his phone and found messages critical of the Trump administration. Last month, Turkish-American streamer Hasan Piker claimed he was detained and questioned for two hours by US Customs and Border Protection agents at Chicago's O'Hare Airport after returning from France. He said agents interrogated him about his political views, including his stance on Trump and Gaza. Piker said the questioning felt 'deliberate'. The searches are intended to verify identity and assess any potential security risks. But the fact is, if you've got nudes anywhere on your phone, they can be found, even if accidentally. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video However, immigration lawyer Dr Jennifer Obaseki tells Metro that concerns are growing about the right to privacy. She asks: 'At what point does the US government feel they can overstep in restricting non-citizens' freedom of political expression, and therefore take that additional step to deny entry? It feels like a stretch on the authority they have, if not an abuse of power.' Dr Obaseki also notes that many of the people who have been interrogated or turned away at the US border have been vocal about the Trump administration and Gaza. The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution protects people from random and arbitrary stops and searches. However, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the federal government claims the power to conduct certain kinds of warrantless stops within 100 miles of the US border. So, if you have anything NSFW on there, you might want to think about clearing it up. Technically, no. But what happens afterwards depends on your immigration status. US citizens and lawful permanent residents cannot be legally denied entry if they refuse to unlock their devices. Non-citizens, including tourists and visa holders, may be refused entry if they don't provide access to their device. And Dr Obaseki says this is more likely than not. 'Non-US citizens who are denied entry will typically be immediately removed. If it's in relation to digital content, though, the officer dealing with you would have to justify the decision,' she says. 'They have to give you a reason – whether they feel that you or the content that you hold shows that you have an intention to cause some kind of security risk, or because of any criminal history. If you don't have a criminal history, they have to consider you or your content as a risk.' If you agree to hand over your phone, the ACLU recommends that you enter your password yourself. Turning off Face ID or fingerprint beforehand can help protect your privacy, too. According to Dr Obaseki, if you have anything questionable on your phone, leave it at home. Simple as. You can always have your phone sent to you, or load your content in the cloud, and use a basic device during your time in the US. 'It's better to have yourself through customs and immigration, rather than have questions and challenges at immigration,' Dr Obaseki says. British travellers must also make sure they have an ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization), which is permission to enter the US, before travel. And Dr Obaseki warns there is no formal appeal process for visa denials. However, there are preparations you can put in place to make potential challenges easier. 'At the point of entry, have someone on standby,' she advises. Meaning, if you're going to be landing and you have someone in the US expecting you, ask them to meet you at the airport. If you provide border agents with the password of your device – or if you don't have one – they can conduct an immediate 'basic search'. This usually means browsing through your texts, photos, apps and social media posts. The ACLU says they might also download the full contents of your device and save a copy of your data. Agents have been required to return your device before you leave the airport since 2018. They could, however, choose to do an 'advanced' or 'forensic' search. This is when they hold onto your device for five days to conduct a thorough search. Agents can keep it for longer due to 'extenuating circumstances', when the period is extended by seven days each time. The ACLU says they have received reports of phones being held for weeks and even months. Should you leave the airport or other border checkpoint without your device, the ACLU advises getting a receipt. This will include information about your device and contact information to follow up. If your denial is linked to digital content or social media associations, Dr Obaseki says you have to think carefully. 'Ask yourself, if somebody has made a decision and made notes about me, who else is going to see them? How long are they going to be stored on my record?' She stresses that there could be a knock-on effect on future travel. Plus, there's no real transparency on how the content taken is going to be used against you. For example, what if a family member goes travelling, will they connect that person to you, and subsequently deny them entry? Dr Obaseki repeats: 'The basis for which the searches are being made must be properly written down so that they can be challenged if they're wrong. If you're denied entry due to being at a university where there was a particular demonstration, for example, that doesn't mean you were automatically associated.' In relation to your online presence, the expert says that the US Department of State, which handles visas and immigration abroad, are now working with social media companies to conduct these screenings. 'Before you go about getting your visa application, they are looking at your handles to find whether you should be allowed to come in,' she explains, adding that this expanded screening is going to step up more in June. 'The justification for that is because Trump has said he is going to be tough on immigration,' she adds. With more reports of travellers being questioned, turned away or detained at US airports, many are thinking twice about visiting. Dr Obaseki says we are likely to see more refusals over the next couple of months, and until the end of the Trump administration. 'We'll then have more cases which we can vet and analyse, and then use to advise people,' she says. According to a recent study by the World Travel and Tourism Council, the US is projected to lose around $12.5 billion (£9.4 billion) in international travel spending this year, largely due to concerns over increased security. Many are opting out of visiting, citing fears of invasive searches, the possibility of being refused entry or being detained at the border. More Trending Still, the US is set to host the 2026 FIFA World Cup, alongside Canada and Mexico, a major draw which is predicted to bring in millions of tourists. However, easing airport security measures doesn't seem to be on the cards ahead of the event. Vice President JD Vance recently joked about deporting football fans who overstay their welcome at a recent press conference for the World Cup. ]'We'll have visitors from close to 100 countries. We want them to come,' he said. 'But when the time is up, they'll have to go home.' The ACLU advises taking precautions to ensure travelling goes as smoothly as possible, when it comes to keeping your devices safe. Here are some of the tips outlined on its website: Let officers know if you have privileged material on your device Travel with as little data and as few devices as possible Encrypt devices with strong and unique passwords and shut them down when crossing the border Store sensitive data in end-to-end encrypted cloud-storage account and remove any sensitive data from your device Upload sensitive photos on your camera to your password-protected laptop or a cloud storage account Keep devices off. If you must turn them on, ensure that they are in airplane mode, with both WiFi and Bluetooth disabled Do you have a story to share? Get in touch by emailing MetroLifestyleTeam@ MORE: Trump warns that Putin wants revenge for Ukraine's drone attacks MORE: Expert reveals clues that Trump and Musk's relationship was doomed from the start MORE: Women who have a miscarriage in West Virginia could be prosecuted
