penalty fare on southeastern trains.

[rickyquicky]

lets remember this is a consumer forum! the thread has definately developed a bit of a sour taste since edward longshanks gave his 2 pence worth. stigy, apologies i took what you said the wrong way, you have been helpful in this thread.

 

back on track, an update:

 

Spoken to the so called 'watchdog' passenger focus. Their advice was basically to send all correspondence to them from IPFAS.

 

it sounds to me like they are just going to check that IPFAS have followed the correct procedure, therefore its probably a waste of time.

 

passenger focus also advised me to pay the fine to prevent admin fees being added. they say i should pay and then claim the money back otherwise the amount is going to keep going up.

 

whats the best course of action now? i dont want to ignore them because it will look bad on my part, who shall i correspond with! IPFAS said they will not have any more correspondance with me because they have made their decision.

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[jkdd77]

lets remember this is a consumer forum! the thread has definately developed a bit of a sour taste since edward longshanks gave his 2 pence worth. stigy, apologies i took what you said the wrong way, you have been helpful in this thread.

 

back on track, an update:

 

Spoken to the so called 'watchdog' passenger focus. Their advice was basically to send all correspondence to them from IPFAS.

 

it sounds to me like they are just going to check that IPFAS have followed the correct procedure, therefore its probably a waste of time.

 

passenger focus also advised me to pay the fine to prevent admin fees being added. they say i should pay and then claim the money back otherwise the amount is going to keep going up.

 

whats the best course of action now? i dont want to ignore them because it will look bad on my part, who shall i correspond with! IPFAS said they will not have any more correspondance with me because they have made their decision.

 

Passenger Focus are clueless.

 

IPFAS can't fine you- only a court can fine you, or otherwise order you to pay them money.

 

If you pay, you won't ever see a penny of your money again, particularly as payment could be construed as "acceptance of the charge".

 

They can't get any money out of you whatosever unless a court rules in their favour, which probably won't happen, and even then, they could only recover such "costs" as actually deemed reasonable by the court.

 

You're doing the right thing by continuing to ignore them- it won't look bad at all as IPFAS have already said they won't enter into any further correspondence, so you've clearly done all you can to resolve matters amicably.

 

You may be interested to know that IPFAS is in fact owned by Southeastern Trains, is based at Southeastern's head office and all its staff are Southeastern employees. Independent? You be the judge.

 

Their intention now is to send threatening letters to frighten you into paying up.

[rickyquicky]

thanks for the info jkdd77, i read point 5 and it is very interesting to see how IPFAS are in fact operated by southeastern.

 

however independent they say they are, it is impossible for them to be completely impartial, and it is funny how they self-proclaim independance!

 

passenger focus were absolutely useless, i spoke to an african-sounding woman whos english wasnt very good at all and therefore i had to explain my situation 3 times before i gave up! after asking to speak to someone else the only thing they can do apparently is check IPFAS done their job correctly.

[rickyquicky]

Longshanks?

 

yeah a poster a page or so again who had a rant about my 'attitude'.

 

he must have been surprised that a consumer forum had some very unhappy consumers.

[rickyquicky]

also a bit of info - i've noticed that my name is incorrectly spelt on the penalty fare notice (or whatever its called)

 

he has put half my surname as my middle name. id better not put my name on here incase it jeopardises anything!

 

i know its picky but does this have any basis to cancel the penalty fare? seeing as they want to throw every bylaw/terms and conditions/smallprint at me, perhaps i could do a little of the same?

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[rickyquicky]

no, he only asked for the penalty fare.

 

just a quick recap for you:

 

i could show the inspector my reciept/photocard/credit card and he called up to check i was who i said i was. so he knew i had paid for my travel so i suppose no 'fare' was due. just the penalty charge according to him for not physically having the ticket.

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[rickyquicky]

thanks for the information, but reading the byelaws, it states no person shall be in breach of byelaw 18 if: 18 (3) (iii) "an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket".

 

i approached the ticket gate in good faith and let pass through the barriers.

 

therefore, how can byelaw 18 be enforced?

 

also doesnt my name being spelt incorrectly mean anything?

[rickyquicky]

also how can there be a fare due if i can prove to the inspector that i have already paid?

 

and regardless, by paying the inspector at the other end still means you travelled without a 'ticket'

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[rickyquicky]

You cannot prove you paid for that journey, it doesnt matter how many receipts,statements etc you produce,only one thing shows you have paid...a valid ticket. (I know you disagree but unfortunately its fact).

You may well have a defence with 18(3) but the rail company can dispute this & then it would only be your word or you find the person who gave permission & get them to write out a witness statement.

However, if they do prosecute it will be probably under the Regulation Of Railways Act to which the 18(3) defence is of no use.

In relation to your name being mis-spelt, thats a non issue as any summons can be amended later.

 

 

 

It actually means you failed to hand over a valid ticket.

 

how can a reciept possibly not prove that i purchased a ticket??!

[rickyquicky]

also, what part of the 'regulation of railways act' could they prosecute under please?

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[jkdd77]

I thought that getting a conviction under the RRA requires proof of criminal intent (mens rea)?

 

In any case, which bit of 5(3) applies? As far as I can tell, a) doesn't apply because the OP has unquestionably paid his fare (season ticket), and, therefore, by definition, has no intent to avoid payment. b) and c) certainly don't apply either.

 

It would be for the TOC to prove criminal intent, and not for the OP to prove his innocence. In the case of a claimed byelaw 18(3) exemption, again the burden of proof would be on the TOC.

 

(3) If any person—

(a)

Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

 

(b)

Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

 

©

Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,

 

If what you say is true, then what is the point in the byelaw 18(3) exemption even existing, as anyone who has been given permission to travel, or whom boarding at a station with no ticket purchase facilities, could still be convicted under the RRA after being given an unjustifed and unlawful penalty fare which they refused to pay?

 

If the OP genuinely believed he had permission from gateline staff to travel without paying for a further ticket (in addition to the season ticket), then, again, how can they possibly convict on the basis of "intent to avoid payment thereof"?

 

Penalty fares are not the best way to deal with these cases, because (virtually) all appeals are rejected, regardless of merit (even if unlawfully charged), and there is no independent scrunity whatsoever- in effect, they are legalised extortion, based on the threat of criminal prosecution- better known as blackmail.

 

http://www.penaltyfare.org.uk/noappeal.htm

http://www.penaltyfare.org.uk/uselessappeals.htm

http://www.penaltyfare.org.uk/dontpay.htm

 

Apart from anything else, a prosecution is blatantly not in the public interest, and the likely worst case scenario in this case is an absolute or conditional discharge- much better than paying an unlawful PF.

 

What exactly is a passenger supposed to do if charged an unlawful penalty fare, which is then "upheld" by the "independent" (ha ha) appeals body? According to your logic, a person can always be convicted for refusing to pay such an unlawful charge, which must be a breach of human rights legislation.

 

Presumably, using your logic, this passenger: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/public-transport-trains-tubes/206691-trains-help-what-might.html

could have been convicted under the RRA?

 

In summary, I am suggesting that the OP believed that he had permission to travel without purchasing an additional ticket (in top of his season), and therefore honestly believed that the fare due was £0. Therefore, there is no chance of securing a conviction for fare evasion.

Edited August 25, 2009 by jkdd77

[rickyquicky]

I thought that getting a conviction under the RRA requires proof of criminal intent (mens rea)?

 

In any case, which bit of 5(3) applies? As far as I can tell, a) doesn't apply because the OP has unquestionably paid his fare (season ticket), and, therefore, by definition, has no intent to avoid payment. b) and c) certainly don't apply either.

 

It would be for the TOC to prove criminal intent, and not for the OP to prove his innocence. In the case of a claimed byelaw 18(3) exemption, again the burden of proof would be on the TOC.

 

(3) If any person—

(a)

Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

 

(b)

Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

 

©

Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,

 

If what you say is true, then what is the point in the byelaw 18(3) exemption even existing, as anyone who has been given permission to travel, or whom boarding at a station with no ticket purchase facilities, could still be convicted under the RRA after being given an unjustifed and unlawful penalty fare which they refused to pay?

 

If the OP genuinely believed he had permission from gateline staff to travel without paying for a further ticket (in addition to the season ticket), then, again, how can they possibly convict on the basis of "intent to avoid payment thereof"?

 

Penalty fares are not the best way to deal with these cases, because (virtually) all appeals are rejected, regardless of merit (even if unlawfully charged), and there is no independent scrunity whatsoever- in effect, they are legalised extortion, based on the threat of criminal prosecution- better known as blackmail.

 

http://www.penaltyfare.org.uk/noappeal.htm

http://www.penaltyfare.org.uk/uselessappeals.htm

http://www.penaltyfare.org.uk/dontpay.htm

 

Apart from anything else, a prosecution is blatantly not in the public interest, and the likely worst case scenario in this case is an absolute or conditional discharge- much better than paying an unlawful PF.

 

What exactly is a passenger supposed to do if charged an unlawful penalty fare, which is then "upheld" by the "independent" (ha ha) appeals body? According to your logic, a person can always be convicted for refusing to pay such an unlawful charge, which must be a breach of human rights legislation.

 

Presumably, using your logic, this passenger: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/public-transport-trains-tubes/206691-trains-help-what-might.html

could have been convicted under the RRA?

 

In summary, I am suggesting that the OP believed that he had permission to travel without purchasing an additional ticket (in top of his season), and therefore honestly believed that the fare due was £0. Therefore, there is no chance of securing a conviction for fare evasion.

 

thanks, someone who understands my point of view.

 

it is essentially legalised extortion in some cases.

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[rickyquicky]

It proves that you paid the railway a certain amount of money, that is all.

It could be argued that it was for a seat reservation, or car parking or for a ticket for another person.

 

Section 5(3) of the RRA would probably be used.

 

ok, but then i have a photocard number that identifies me specifically, the guard at the station confirmed that i did in fact have a ticket (as i suggested he call up to confirm i had indeed purchased a season ticket)

 

therefore there is some sort of record kept which customers should be able to get hold of.

 

sll i'd need to do is obtain this and this would prove 100% that the ticket purchased was indeed for me as it would be linked to my photocard number.

 

also, there would be the small matter of the amount paid being exactly the same as a monthly season ticket from that station!

[rickyquicky]

Im not going to repeat myself, this is my opinion of the situation faced by the OP.

Im not trying to persuade anyone that my opinion is better than anyone elses, it is merely my interpretation of the law as it stands today.

 

In relation to the independency of the appeals bodies, the only way to change that is through your MP, just like every other law on the statute books.

 

I will just say however that a £20 Penalty Fare must surely be better than a criminal conviction? even if the outcome is an AD or CD.

 

but a criminal conviction for what? im not a criminal! your statement kind of backs up the view of bullying by rail companies.

 

PAY THIS OR FACE PROSECUTION! its just a con by rail companies to extort money from customers.

Edited August 25, 2009 by rickyquicky

[SRPO]

Deleted.

Edited September 23, 2009 by SRPO

[jkdd77]

I found this:

Road Traffic Offences Transport Offences: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service

 

Code for Crown Prosecutors - Considerations

 

 

The principal purposes of transport legislation are:

• to preserve the safety and comfort of passengers and staff;
  
• to prevent acts of dishonesty by either passengers of staff.
  

...

 

A prosecution may not be required where there is a purely technical breach of the law if:

• there has been no risk to public safety; (check) and
  
• the offence resulted from a genuine oversight or misunderstanding; (check) and
  
• no injury or loss has been sustained by either passengers or staff. (check)
  

I wasn't surprised when Old-CodJA said in a much earlier post that he has not heard of season ticket holders being prosecuted- this may be why (in addition to the risk of financial loss to the TOC if a defendant is acquitted, or if they don't recover their costs after a conviction).

 

Even though Southeastern clearly have their own separate prosecution department, they are, at least in theory, bound by the same guidelines. The DfT also suggest that they don't want these cases prosecuted.

 

I unreservedly condemn real fare evasion, but I also condemn those who use the criminal courts, or threat of prosecution, as a means of persecuting the (morally) innocent.

Edited August 25, 2009 by jkdd77

[jkdd77]

See below:

 

You seem to be forgetting one small point:

 

When asked by an authorised person, did you hand over for inspection a valid ticket for the journey you had made?

 

No.

 

Because of your failure to comply with:

 

A) The Railway Byelaws

not true- byelaw 18(3)

B) The Penalty Fare Rules

not true- rule 4.29

C) The National Conditions Of Carriage

irrelevant- PF rules and byelaws take precedence. Any breach of the NRCOC that is not also a breach of relevant criminal legislation would be a purely civil matter.

 

You are accusing everyone with a different view to yourself of being a bully & extortion.

 

Now I really dont think I can contribute anything else to this thread.

[rickyquicky]

You seem to be forgetting one small point:

 

When asked by an authorised person, did you hand over for inspection a valid ticket for the journey you had made?

 

No.

 

Because of your failure to comply with:

 

A) The Railway Byelaws

B) The Penalty Fare Rules

C) The National Conditions Of Carriage

 

You are accusing everyone with a different view to yourself of being a bully & extortion.

 

Now I really dont think I can contribute anything else to this thread.

 

but i have 'complied' with the byelaws...i was let through the barriers at my local station by staff, in other words i was given permission to travel by an authorised member of staff.

 

im not accusing anyone with a different view of being a bully or extortionist, i am accusing the rail company of being a bully. i appreciate every opinion on here whether positive or not.

 

in summary, i dont feel that i have breached anything, at the end of the day i genuinely paid for my travel, had misplaced my ticket, and was given permission by a member of staff to travel.

 

how can i be guilty of any offence when a member of staff giving me permission to travel due to the documents that i did have he obviously felt were sufficient.

 

its like me telling my neighbour he can park on my drive and then when he does i kindly clamp his car and then say he shouldnt have parked there in the first place.

[rickyquicky]

*UPDATE*

 

yesterday i recieved a 'notification of summons application'.

 

i am told that i now have to pay £50, or they will take me to court for the outstanding £20, plus compensation of the amount, plus £150 towards prosecution costs.

 

this is their statement of 'facts':

 

"on 30th......... 2009 at ....... Mr.......... of ...... road was reported for travelling from sidcup to cannon street and not paying the fare due for the journey that had been made. a penalty fare notice was issued because 'ftcst' (dont know what that means) which showed that an amount of £20 must be paid within 21 days of the date of issue of the notice."

 

"at the time of making this statement, the fare that was actually due at the time of travel has still not been paid and i therefore contend that the intention of mr.......... was to travel on the railway without having previously paid their fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof."

 

 

 

what is the best course of action now? you can see that these people still dont understand the fact i had purchased a ticket. i am accused of 'intent to avoid a fare', even though i sent them a copy of my reciept and credit card number. and the guard at the station even called through and confirmed that i had paid for a ticket.

 

how can they take me to court because if it is based on these 'facts' they are going to look very silly.

 

shall i reply to this letter stating why i have no intention to pay? or shall i just pay the 50 quid? or wait to go to court?