First Class Travel

Aidy · Fri 07 Mar, 2008 22.12

Every Saturday I catch a train from Bath to Swindon on my way back from school. But they never check your ticket, so tomorrow I'm just gonna go and sit in First Class even though I haven’t paid for it.

So I was just wondering if anyone has done this, have you been caught, was it worth it?
and do any of us actually travel first class regularly on transport and pay for it?

Sput · Fri 07 Mar, 2008 22.57

I know that on some services they'll only check the first class to ensure that doesn't happen.

Mr Q · Fri 07 Mar, 2008 23.21

Well, on the topic of fare evasion, I'd consider what the Karma Llama has to say:

http://karmacentral.com.au/

It's bad, it's wrong - don't do it.

timgraham · Sat 08 Mar, 2008 00.14

Seeing the ticket inspectors here (or "Authorised Public Transport Officers) mount a plain-clothes sting once is enough to scare you off the thought of fare evasion ever again. It's only really worthwhile if you aren't getting what you pay for (which is often the case in Melbourne).

Having said that if there are empty seats in first class surely it wouldn't hurt to upgrade some, airline-style?

Gluben · Sat 08 Mar, 2008 00.22

I sat in First Class on the way home from uni, and my ticket got checked but no fuss was made. There was only one other man there, and the train wasn't that busy anyway, so I doubt anyone cared. Not that it was much different from the Standard carriages.

Ronnie Rowlands · Sat 08 Mar, 2008 09.26

I paid my fare on a train once, but because of complications I ended up sitting on the floor. I managed to spend the last 2 hours of the journey in an empty first class though. If some staff did come past I picked up a book and put on a stern face, so that I looked like I belonged there. Seemed to work, I just wish I'd been arsed to go back and tell my mum and brother that there we free seats in first class.

Finn · Sat 08 Mar, 2008 12.18

Ronnie Rowlands wrote:I paid my fare on a train once, but because of complications I ended up sitting on the floor. I managed to spend the last 2 hours of the journey in an empty first class though. If some staff did come past I picked up a book and put on a stern face, so that I looked like I belonged there. Seemed to work, I just wish I'd been arsed to go back and tell my mum and brother that there we free seats in first class.

I can't remember the exact train regulations, but I seem to recall that if the train is that overcrowded and there are seats free in first, most train companies won't have a problem with you sitting in first, as long as no first class customer is unable to sit.

I was certainly on a Virgin train last year where the train manager came on the PA system and told people in corridors aisles etc to move forward to first.

cwathen · Sat 08 Mar, 2008 23.45

First Great Western (now the worst performing train company in the country - I miss Wessex Trains

) have recently implemented what seems to be a ridiculously OTT procedure regarding pregnant women travelling in first class:

Pregnant women who are a certain length into their pregnancy, who carry documentary evidence to prove that, who also hold a season ticket, can apply (and must explicitly apply) for special authorisation to sit in first class if there are no empty seats left in standard class.

Why the country's worst perfoming TOC doesn't just do the obvious and say "pregnant women can sit in first class if there is no space in standard" is beyond me.

Mr Q · Sat 08 Mar, 2008 23.56

cwathen wrote:Why the country's worst perfoming TOC doesn't just do the obvious and say "pregnant women can sit in first class if there is no space in standard" is beyond me.

What First Great Western are doing, although it appears onerous, is ensuring precisely that. While requiring explicit approval might be going a bit far, the idea that proof needs to be offered is entirely valid. If you merely say "pregnant women can set in first class if there is no space in standard", then it is entirely possible (indeed likely) that some women might attempt to cheat the system by faking pregnancy. First Great Western are simply trying to limit the opportunities for that to happen. Not only is that a good commercial decision, it's actually fairer to the women who genuinely are pregnant.

cwathen · Sun 09 Mar, 2008 00.21

Mr Q wrote:
cwathen wrote:Why the country's worst perfoming TOC doesn't just do the obvious and say "pregnant women can sit in first class if there is no space in standard" is beyond me.
What First Great Western are doing, although it appears onerous, is ensuring precisely that. While requiring explicit approval might be going a bit far, the idea that proof needs to be offered is entirely valid. If you merely say "pregnant women can set in first class if there is no space in standard", then it is entirely possible (indeed likely) that some women might attempt to cheat the system by faking pregnancy. First Great Western are simply trying to limit the opportunities for that to happen. Not only is that a good commercial decision, it's actually fairer to the women who genuinely are pregnant.

The only problem with your argument though is the lack of common sense. I doubt very much that there are significant numbers of women who will travel with a cushion shoved up their top to fake pregnancy just in order to get a few extra inches of seat space or to avoid having to stand on a packed train whilst first class seats are empty.

Furthermore, FGW won't even allow all pregnant women beyond a specified length of term (even after proving it to their satisfaction) to their first class concession - they must first have bought into a season ticket.

Also, as a company FGW cannot afford any more bad press. When originally formed as Great Western Trains - a company which ran what was the Intercity 125 route from Paddington - Penzance they did fine. When initially taken over by Firstgroup and becoming First Great Western they still did fine. When taking on the old Thames Trains franchise they did OK. But since taking over the routes that used to be run as a separate franchise by Wessex Trains, they have become a shambles. They are the only TOC at serious risk of being stripped of their franchise early. ATM, they need to be doing everything (and perhaps more importantly, need to be seen to be doing everything) to keep the punters happy. They don't need to be rolling out ridiculous levels of qualification to ensure that their 'generous' policies benefit only a minority of people.

Mr Q · Sun 09 Mar, 2008 01.45

cwathen wrote:The only problem with your argument though is the lack of common sense. I doubt very much that there are significant numbers of women who will travel with a cushion shoved up their top to fake pregnancy just in order to get a few extra inches of seat space or to avoid having to stand on a packed train whilst first class seats are empty.

While I agree that the prospect of women stuffing pillows up up their tops seems unlikely, I don't think that's the main concern here. By having a policy which simply states that 'all pregnant women can travel in first class if no seats are available in standard', where there is no requirement to verify that a woman is in fact pregnant, then there's still significant scope for cheating. I would argue that if a woman was asked to present her ticket in first class, and she responds by saying "oh, I'm pregnant", that irrespective of her appearance, no ticket inspector is dare going to challenge that.

Furthermore, FGW won't even allow all pregnant women beyond a specified length of term (even after proving it to their satisfaction) to their first class concession - they must first have bought into a season ticket.

While I accept that might seem unfair, I think the point is to give preference to 'loyal' customers. At the end of the day, nothing is stopping any pregnant woman from paying for a first class ticket. What FGW are attempting to do here is reward regular passengers.

We have a similar situation here where customers with monthly or yearly tickets get a free daily ticket if our train provider, Connex, fails to meet certain benchmarks with respect of lateness or cancellations each month. Now, obviously a great deal more customers are affected by these service disruptions than just monthly and yearly ticket holders - but preference is given to those customers, which acts as an incentive for commuters to buy long-term 'season' tickets rather than short term one-off or daily tickets.

Also, as a company FGW cannot afford any more bad press. When originally formed as Great Western Trains - a company which ran what was the Intercity 125 route from Paddington - Penzance they did fine. When initially taken over by Firstgroup and becoming First Great Western they still did fine. When taking on the old Thames Trains franchise they did OK. But since taking over the routes that used to be run as a separate franchise by Wessex Trains, they have become a shambles. They are the only TOC at serious risk of being stripped of their franchise early. ATM, they need to be doing everything (and perhaps more importantly, need to be seen to be doing everything) to keep the punters happy. They don't need to be rolling out ridiculous levels of qualification to ensure that their 'generous' policies benefit only a minority of people.

Well, that's a different matter entirely, and I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying. However, obviously FGW are making the commercial decision to limit their exposure to these sorts of generosities.