Ircas fine and contesting it

[BulliedBySWT]

Hi,

I am currently in dispute with IRCAS regards a penalty notice from South West Trains and I am fighting for information to substantiate my claim. However, in the meantime they and an agent working on behalf of them are insisting I must pay regardless of any dispute or further information being presented. I believe this is wholly unfair and would like advice:

 

I was ticket checked whilst changing trains at Ascot back in February and could not produce my days’ ticket that I had purchased (sadly with cash at office) but simply could not find. I produced the previous few days’ tickets and a plethora of previous tickets which I had on person to show I was a regular commuter and not a common fair dodger, i just couldn’t produce that days’. I was also travelling on a line Ascot – Guildford that is nigh on 100% ticket checked every journey so why as a regular commuter would I try dodge a fair! The agent however insisted on giving me a penalty fare.

 

I offered to pay the original fair since I could understand I could not produce a ticket when asked but he refused it. He never explained the terms & conditions of 21 days to contact IRCAS, in fact I’m damn sure he said I’d receive a letter. However , I some time later read the terms and conditions and noticed it said within 21 days so I wrote off appealing. They wrote back and said it was received after 24 days and therefore appeal was denied. I contested and asked for a photocopy of envelope which they provided but it is inconclusive and I am very upset they are forcing this through on basis of a potentially late post office delivery.

 

I have ALWAYS replied to their letters on time and I have asked for clarification of SWT's own terms & conditions to which the notice was issued: (I found these conditions to ask on another forum) Noteably However, they say contact SWT for that info which I have done and which they do not acknowledge in any replies, simply stating if IRCAS has denied appeal then nothing is to be done. My info request is to clarify the legality of that fine in first place, and I would need such info should I end up going to court.

 

IRCAS meanwhile slapped a £60 admin fee on top (£80 total) which is totally disproportionate since I had already advised in writing I was in dispute and seeking clarification of the terms.

 

So SWT refer me back to IRCAS whom refer me back to SWT for terms. Playing me off. I am not even entirely sure to whom I am supposed to owe money to! Another question I posed in writing to SWT which was completely ignored in written replies.

 

Meanwhile I have no answers and likely to be summoned. How can this arise?

 

Last month I then received a Final Notice letter from Capital resolve seeking payment, so now I am completely baffled whom is handling what and I have still not got answers from my written requests. I immediately wrote back advising I did not recognise the references they gave (it really was vague and bore no relation to previous references) if only to buy me time to get outstanding replies from SWT. They sent a postcard stating home visit in 7 days so I slapped a Permitted persons entry only notice on my gate to stop that as I consider it harassment.

 

I have resorted to writing with full correspondence history to the MD of Customer Services, Tim Shoveller , requesting intervention and information but again I had a simple non informative reply that it is now a legal matter and omitting all information I’d requested.

 

If I had never bought a ticket, not faithfully replied in time I would accept this charge but I am bitterly aggrieved at the sheer bullishness of this and if I was more social media aware I would be damning them from upon high.

 

What can I do when I have already faithfully corresponded in writing to ALL communications from all parties and yet have received nothing back but demands and brick walls?

 

This all boils down to my letter allegedly arriving at IRCAS offices a whole 3 days late!

 

With all circumstances considered I do not believe they could realistically have upheld the fine any other way. SWT did not act in a ‘fair and reasonable’ manner in issuing the penalty notice since I had offered to pay the fare, produced aforementioned plethora of old tickets whilst bearing in mind the line is 100% ticket checked which I would have been well aware of.

 

By time I continue to contest this or write to MP or regulator they will have issued a summons and forcibly bullied the money out of me. It will then be impossible to recoup.

 

If anyone wants to review all correspondence then please do advise I can mail them or attach.

Sorry for long post but better all in one than many questions/replies yes?

 

And lastly, thanks in advance!

[Old-CodJA]

Firstly, I am going to begin by saying that you may not like all of my responses to your questions, because they may not be what you want to hear, but it is important to understand the process fully.

 

Hi,

I am currently in dispute with IRCAS regards a penalty notice from South West Trains and I am fighting for information to substantiate my claim. However, in the meantime they and an agent working on behalf of them are insisting I must pay regardless of any dispute or further information being presented. I believe this is wholly unfair and would like advice:

 

I was ticket checked whilst changing trains at Ascot back in February and could not produce my days’ ticket that I had purchased (sadly with cash at office) but simply could not find. I produced the previous few days’ tickets and a plethora of previous tickets which I had on person to show I was a regular commuter and not a common fair dodger, i just couldn’t produce that days’. I was also travelling on a line Ascot – Guildford that is nigh on 100% ticket checked every journey so why as a regular commuter would I try dodge a fair! The agent however insisted on giving me a penalty fare.

 

Unfortunately, the onus is on the traveller to produce a ticket on demand. We all make mistakes of course and can mislay something, but this situation can lead to an inspector / authorised person issuing a Penalty Fare Notice, which are not designed to deal with 'fair dodgers' as you put it, they are designed to deter ticketless travel and to deal with such low-level matters as this. The issue is discretionary, if this was an inspector who issued it and if s/he was not convinced by your story, the alternative could have been a report for breach of Byelaw. The Penalty Fare Notice is a means of resolving this by civil process.

 

I offered to pay the original fair since I could understand I could not produce a ticket when asked but he refused it. He never explained the terms & conditions of 21 days to contact IRCAS, in fact I’m damn sure he said I’d receive a letter.

 

Offering to pay the fare after being reported for travelling without a ticket or failing to produce one does not prevent the possibility of further action. The legislations in place make clear that any traveller must show a valid ticket when asked if the opportunity to get one has been available to them.

 

You could have insisted that the issuer took the single fare and put this on the Penalty Notice with the balance to pay owing.

 

The Penalty Fare Notice, which presumably you had signed as having read, does have the terms & conditions of issue printed on it. The person to whom it is issued signs next to print which advises that the recipient 'understands that s/he has 21 days in which to pay or appeal in writing'. It is hard to convince any Court that you were not told the conditions of issue of a notice when you have signed them as understood.

 

 

However , I some time later read the terms and conditions and noticed it said within 21 days so I wrote off appealing. They wrote back and said it was received after 24 days and therefore appeal was denied. I contested and asked for a photocopy of envelope which they provided but it is inconclusive and I am very upset they are forcing this through on basis of a potentially late post office delivery.

 

I have ALWAYS replied to their letters on time and I have asked for clarification of SWT's own terms & conditions to which the notice was issued: (I found these conditions to ask on another forum)

 

 

Penalty Fares Notices must be issued pursuant to the Penalty Fares (Railways) Rules which are defined by the Railways Act. Whilst I agree that rejecting a first letter of appeal received late by a couple of days does seem a little harsh, can you confirm that you have had no previous penalty notices or warnings that may have had a bearing on the decision?

 

The relevant SWT leaflet can be found here

http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/uploads/penaltyfaresleafletdecember2012.pdf

 

Noteably However, they say contact SWT for that info which I have done and which they do not acknowledge in any replies, simply stating if IRCAS has denied appeal then nothing is to be done. My info request is to clarify the legality of that fine in first place, and I would need such info should I end up going to court.

 

I know that if someone makes a formal demand for payment it is tempting always to refer to it as a 'fine', but this is not the case. Only the Courts can impose fines. A Penalty Fare is a civil remedy and is an opportunity to dispose of a liability without more serious action. If a Summons to Court is issued it will not allege the failure to pay a Penalty Fare. It will allege either breach of Railway Byelaw, or intent to avoid a fare. The latter of these two is very unlikely in my view as the prosecutor will need to evidence the claim that you had not paid and did intend not to pay.

 

The breach of Byelaw matter is strict liability though, all the prosecutor needs to show if they proceed to issue a Summons alleging breach of National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005) is to show that you failed to show a ticket when you were asked to do so.

 

IRCAS meanwhile slapped a £60 admin fee on top (£80 total) which is totally disproportionate since I had already advised in writing I was in dispute and seeking clarification of the terms.

 

The letters sent out by the agencies such as IRCAS do make clear that administration charges will be added if not paid in due time. Their charges cannot be pursued in any criminal charge, they are a civil matter. Any summons will only relate to the failure to show a ticket.

 

 

 

So SWT refer me back to IRCAS whom refer me back to SWT for terms. Playing me off. I am not even entirely sure to whom I am supposed to owe money to! Another question I posed in writing to SWT which was completely ignored in written replies.

 

IRCAS and Capitol Resolve are agencies who are acting on behalf of SWT. It is SWT who have the final decision.

 

 

 

Meanwhile I have no answers and likely to be summoned. How can this arise?

 

If the TOC can show that their agents have followed the correct procedures and that you have failed to successfully appeal or pay in good time, they are at liberty to cancel the Penalty Fare Notice and proceed to issue a Summons.

 

 

Last month I then received a Final Notice letter from Capital resolve seeking payment, so now I am completely baffled whom is handling what and I have still not got answers from my written requests. I immediately wrote back advising I did not recognise the references they gave (it really was vague and bore no relation to previous references) if only to buy me time to get outstanding replies from SWT. They sent a postcard stating home visit in 7 days so I slapped a Permitted persons entry only notice on my gate to stop that as I consider it harassment.

 

 

I'm afraid that this is very unlikely to prevent further action.

 

Capitol Resolve is a debt collection agency based in Evesham. They are subject to the legally binding practices applying to all debt collectors and if this remains unpaid, or otherwise unresolved it will be referred back to the TOC or their prosecution agents for issue of a Summons to be heard in a Magistrates Court.

 

SWT do this in-house and a sign saying 'permitted persons only' will not prevent service of a legitimately issued summons.

 

 

I have resorted to writing with full correspondence history to the MD of Customer Services, Tim Shoveller, requesting intervention and information but again I had a simple non informative reply that it is now a legal matter and omitting all information I’d requested.

 

Unfortunately, although you may consider it unhelpful and I can see why, Tim Shoveller's response that this is 'now a legal matter' seems to suggest that the decision to cancel the Penalty Fare Notice and proceed has already been taken.

 

Could your letter to him have been considered to be accusatory and demanding?

 

 

If I had never bought a ticket, not faithfully replied in time I would accept this charge but I am bitterly aggrieved at the sheer bullishness of this and if I was more social media aware I would be damning them from upon high. What can I do when I have already faithfully corresponded in writing to ALL communications from all parties and yet have received nothing back but demands and brick walls?

 

 

Firstly, have you written to the Independent Appeals Service? ( Either IAS or IPFAS )

 

If yes, maybe a letter to Passenger Focus might help, but don't be tempted to try to short-cut the process. Passenger Focus will need to see that you have taken all the proper steps to try to resolve any dispute.

 

You may like to consider paying the sum demanded and taking up the complaint with Passenger Focus, who, if your complaint is found justified will often be able to secure a refund. It is not without risk, because if it can be shown that you were negligent then you may get nothing, but if it is found that IRCAS have acted unreasonably, then I suggest it may be resolved pretty quickly.

 

 

This all boils down to my letter allegedly arriving at IRCAS offices a whole 3 days late!

 

The reality is that if this proceeds to Court it will boil down to whether you showed a ticket or not.

 

 

With all circumstances considered I do not believe they could realistically have upheld the fine any other way. SWT did not act in a ‘fair and reasonable’ manner in issuing the penalty notice since I had offered to pay the fare, produced aforementioned plethora of old tickets whilst bearing in mind the line is 100% ticket checked which I would have been well aware of.

 

Whether or not to accept a fare is entirely at the discretion of the staff concerned.

 

 

By time I continue to contest this or write to MP or regulator they will have issued a summons and forcibly bullied the money out of me. It will then be impossible to recoup.

 

If you genuinely believe that you have done nothing wrong, then you can allow this to go to issue of Summons and argue the case at Court, however I agree, there is much risk for you in this strategy.

 

 

If anyone wants to review all correspondence then please do advise I can mail them or attach.

Sorry for long post but better all in one than many questions/replies yes?

 

And lastly, thanks in advance!

 

It is against forum rules to advise by PM.

 

the best thing you can do is to sanitise any letters by removing case references and personal details and post openly so that you get the benefit of all users opinions

Edited September 5, 2013 by Old-CodJA

[Grotesque]

Was it a season ticket? Just thinking SLAH. Not that that helps now of course; but may explain why a PF was issued in the first place as opposed to any other course of action.

[stifle]

Was it a season ticket? Just thinking SLAH. Not that that helps now of course; but may explain why a PF was issued in the first place as opposed to any other course of action.

 

Seems unlikely, as the OP refers to "previous days' tickets".

[Grotesque]

Do you know SLAH?

[Stigy]

Unfortunately, BulliedbySWT, as Old Codja has said, the onus is on the passenger to produce a valid rail ticket.

 

Look at this from SWT's point of view, you couldn't show a ticket, so what's to say you actually bought on on THIS OCCASION? It matters not what you have bought previously, as this is irrelevant. I think you are wasting your time, because judging by your post, the person that issued the notice was acting correctly to do so. If they believed you were a 'fare dodger' you would, or at least should have, been reported for the offence and bypassed the Penalty Fare Notice in the first place. Like it or not, you have committed an offence under Byelaw 18(2) of the National Railway Byelaws (2005). You can complain and appeal till the cows come home, but I'm afraid you might end up with that summons. In which case you'll have to argue your case with the Magistrates. Ordinarily pleading not guilty I'd suggest you to do if you feel you're in the right, but you really have no defence here from what I can see.

[BulliedBySWT]

Hi Old-CodJa, thanks for your excellent detailed reply and I never mind positive criticism so sometimes liking an answer is not what is always important so I take on board everything. That said I’d like reply in context.

 

“The issue is discretionary, if this was an inspector who issued it and if s/he was not convinced by your story”

- I’m not sure how producing previous days/weeks tickets and tipping entire contents out of bag and pockets for nigh on ten minutes can be viewed as unconvincing, especially considering too I state the connection is ALWAYS ticket checked. Fair and due consideration was certainly not even considered here

 

Can you confirm that you have had no previous penalty notices or warnings that may have had a bearing on the decision?

 

Unfortunatley I cannot. I did have another which was issued in January and I had written to them. It was subsequently settled in April for the original fare with penalty fare excess reduced but I cannot understand why they would refuse one based on the first then settle the first!

 

This may look bad but seriously, I must be unluckiest traveller as these were only 2 times I did not have a ticket and both times I get checked. I then got a third in July as I hadn’t realised until request that I’d left my Gold Card Season ticket at home. That was luckily completely quoshed but the 3 times I don’t have a ticket are the 3 days they hold checks. Some people just born unlucky!

 

However, the agent could not know this at time so was not a contributing factor to his issuance and therefore I still maintain he did not show due care and consideration as stated they are required to in their Terms & Conditions.

 

IRCAS and Capitol Resolve are agencies who are acting on behalf of SWT. It is SWT who have the final decision.

 

SWT have written to me stating that as it is a legal matter with IRCAS and they cannot get involved. I have asked them clarify to whom any money is owed since if IRCAS are acting on behalf of the TOC (SWT) then surely they have discretion at any time during the process to make a change of either reduction or cancellation of any penalty fare or even if it should go to court. They state they cannot enter into any further discussion over it. I am genuinely confused!

 

If the TOC can show that their agents have followed the correct procedures and that you have failed to successfully appeal or pay in good time, they are at liberty to cancel the Penalty Fare Notice and proceed to issue a Summons.

 

Again, this is SWT yes? So why do they write that they cannot get involved and state it is a legal matter with IRCAS?

 

SWT do this in-house and a sign saying 'permitted persons only' will not prevent service of a legitimately issued summons.

 

My sign was merely to stop unwarranted house visits by said agency who I expect were merely trying to scare me into paying. But again you state SWT will be the ones who force the action.

 

Could your letter to him have been considered to be accusatory and demanding?

 

No, not at all. I was demanding in respect that I was unhappy with replies so far and requested information but I merely pointed out my gross unhappiness at the situation. I am always nothing but polite since aggression does get you no-where.

 

Firstly, have you written to the Independent Appeals Service? ( Either IAS or IPFAS )

 

Having read their website they state that if the appeal has been turned down then there is nothing they can do so no I have not progressed this.

 

Lastly, if I continue to pursue my appeal, if they decide to simply issue a summons am I immediately liable for much increased cost or is it a last chance to settle it? I ask since whilst I write they can simply do this and I am proverbially shafted.

 

I have tonight written another letter to SWT again asking them to clarify the agents authority and to clarify the legal aspect of whom is issuing action and the role SWT have.

 

The system seems designed to be a closed shop!

[firstclassx]

Your "appeal" has been declined. There is no further right to appeal. All you are going to do is cause yourself delay and additional administrative costs, and eventually, if you keep pushing, a court appearance, fine, and criminal record.

 

IRCAS are contracted to manage Penalty Fares administration, on behalf of SWT.

 

Eventually IRCAS will inform SWT that the matter remains unresolved, and accordingly, SWT's prosecutor will begin prosecution proceedings.

 

IRCAS assess appeals independently, i.e. SWT cannot influence or direct them, they would be breaching the law/regulations if they did so. This is enshrined in the law that allows for penalty fares.

 

I suggest you immediately pay the Penalty Fare and any costs you have subsequently incurred as a result of your continued delay in paying THEN start writing your letters.

Edited September 9, 2013 by firstclassx

[BulliedBySWT]

Stigy, I have never not accepted that I failed to show a ticket and as such was in the wrong. But I have argued that extenuating evidence and circumstance should have been taken into consideration and have always offered to pay the minimum fare to which I was not offered the chance (but cannot prove). I firmly believe that if I had replied say after 10 days this case would never have got as far as it has. They are simply using an alleged 3 day late letter as a battering ram to extort money. There is absolutely nothing 'civil' about that.

 

Indeed if you read down I had an outstanding ticket from January and it was only because of the issue with this one in Feb that I realised onus was on me to appeal first. On neither occasion did they advise on the T&C's and my eyesight is such that I cannot read the small print. I simply signed to say I'd received it, we all do this on documents every day without really reading it. SWT are modern highwaymen, plain and simple.

[BulliedBySWT]

Do you know SLAH?

No sorry, no idea what that refers to

[BulliedBySWT]

Firstclassx

That is why I am in written dialogue SWT in regards the validity of the penalty fare in first instance. All appeals in law are subject to review and if they are not replying to my requests for information to take to court then how can that process be fair? Would you have advised Abu Hamza to be deported then write his letters? An extreme point I know but the basis is I have not refused to pay, indeed I have always offered the minimum fare, I have simply questioned the issuance of the notice and wish to resolve civilly. Indeed, to make the whole disgusting SWT issue go away I would pay the original £20 and continue to contest it but as they have added totally dis-proportionate costs on whilst I was already in dialogue with them I am quite rightly aggrieved. Why not add £10,000 after 21 days, that'd have good results and I would not be able to argue case yes?. Would you suggest I pay £20 in good faith, it is afterall still a civil matter?

 

I am disappointed that those like yourself simply want everyone to be completely submissive, roll over and die and let them carry on regardless.

[firstclassx]

Firstclassx

That is why I am in written dialogue SWT in regards the validity of the penalty fare in first instance. All appeals in law are subject to review and if they are not replying to my requests for information to take to court then how can that process be fair? Would you have advised Abu Hamza to be deported then write his letters? An extreme point I know but the basis is I have not refused to pay, indeed I have always offered the minimum fare, I have simply questioned the issuance of the notice and wish to resolve civilly. Indeed, to make the whole disgusting SWT issue go away I would pay the original £20 and continue to contest it but as they have added totally dis-proportionate costs on whilst I was already in dialogue with them I am quite rightly aggrieved. Why not add £10,000 after 21 days, that'd have good results and I would not be able to argue case yes?. Would you suggest I pay £20 in good faith, it is afterall still a civil matter?

 

I am disappointed that those like yourself simply want everyone to be completely submissive, roll over and die and let them carry on regardless.

 

Bottom line - penalty fare was issued correctly. You chose, completely freely, to keep delaying payment for your own mistake. So to kick off, the £20 should be paid to SWT regardless. You legally owe that because of something you did wrong. You might not like the idea of paying the £20 in the first place, but it was avoidable by you complying with the terms and conditions of travelling by rail.

 

Had you accepted that, and just paid the £20 within the timescales- none of this would have happened. This is where you messed up. You took the approach that because YOU didn't feel it was fair, you weren't going to pay it - despite it being issued correctly.

 

My final advice on this is that, yes, it is currently a CIVIL matter. If you keep going further with this, and you are writing to SWT/IRCAS in an offensive manner, where you are attempting to "attack" them - you are going to find yourself dealing with a CRIMINAL matter.

 

You must remember that you broke (criminal) law, and the way that the Inspector decided to deal with it was by way of a Penalty Fare, rather than prosecute you. The Inspector could have chosen to report you for prosecution from the very beginning. The Penalty Fare can be cancelled/withdrawn and prosecution proceedings initiated. Do you really want to end up being successfully prosecuted in court for £80?

 

£80, as forum members will tell you, is a very reasonable amount to "settle" the incident.

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

I'm not railway trained, but I'm afraid I agree with firstclassx. I've been around this forum for a while now and I've never yet seen a good result from someone explaining the error of their ways to a TOC. You might think the system is heavy-handed, but they have the law behind them and fare evasion is a major problem, I believe, which is putting up fares for the passengers who do pay.

 

From a lay person's point of view, if someone produced mounds of expired tickets, that would probably make me wonder why they had hung onto them all. I discard mine once the journey has finished.

 

I would also hesitate to encourage you to 'not roll over and die' and keep fighting, because if this ends up in court, you could blame CAG for misadvising you.

 

My best, HB

[Grotesque]

No sorry, no idea what that refers to

 

Sorry, no problem, I was referring to another poster who also clearly didn't (but should have!).

[Grotesque]

I would also hesitate to encourage you to 'not roll over and die' and keep fighting, because if this ends up in court, you could blame CAG for misadvising you.

 

My best, HB

 

Malfeasance, misprision,the possibilities are endless

[BulliedBySWT]

Bottom line - penalty fare was issued correctly. You chose, completely freely, to keep delaying payment for your own mistake. So to kick off, the £20 should be paid to SWT regardless. You legally owe that because of something you did wrong. You might not like the idea of paying the £20 in the first place, but it was avoidable by you complying with the terms and conditions of travelling by rail.

 

Had you accepted that, and just paid the £20 within the timescales- none of this would have happened.

 

The penalty may have been issued correctly but it was "unfairly" issued as per their own T&C's.

I didn't do something wrong as you put it, I was simply unable to prove I was in the right (having had paid for a ticket, just guilty of not keeping it safe but thats not a crime)

I DID in good faith reply within the timescales but for whatever reason unbeknown to them they chose to reject it even though they say it arrived late, that was out of my control as I posted within time. That's my main grievance and reason for delay and if you had read up I had offered to pay the minimum fare, if he had been concerned with anything civil he would have explained fully. You can pay the minimum and argue the difference as I have learnt now, this was not the case. He was merely concerned with his staff quotas, simple!

 

you are writing to SWT/IRCAS in an offensive manner, where you are attempting to "attack" them - you are going to find yourself dealing with a CRIMINAL matter.

My letters are formal and polite, and I have complained within my rights. That is not attacking them, that is a consumer complaining about the service & treatment received.

 

You must remember that you broke (criminal) law, and the way that the Inspector decided to deal with it was by way of a Penalty Fare, rather than prosecute you. The Inspector could have chosen to report you for prosecution from the very beginning.

I didn't break the law as you put it, I was simply unable to prove I was in the right (having had paid for a ticket, just guilty of not keeping it safe but thats not a crime, sadly unable to prove it though and your terminology offends)

Never in a million years would he proceed with penalty without proof of intent!

 

The Penalty Fare can be cancelled/withdrawn and prosecution proceedings initiated. Do you really want to end up being successfully prosecuted in court for £80?

 

No but again, I appealed in time to a £20 penalty, was refused and on basis of an alleged 3 day late letter which was in control of the lovely PO, they slap 400% on. If you consider that fair and just and I should just accept it then I can but say you work or are affiliated in some way with a TOC!

 

£80, as forum members will tell you, is a very reasonable amount to "settle" the incident.

I would under normal circumstances totally agree with you but a catalogue of bad service and bullying does not make it right. I was in breach of the byelaw but as I know I had a ticket I did not break the law! IRCAS rejection was dubious and unfair and the 400% increase was unfair when dialogue was open. How you can say this is just and acceptable is beyond me!

 

Please tell me honestly, what will my rolling over, paying up and dying do to stop them continuing this regime? Will they give me my money back if I say pretty please or will they say to themselves no one is objecting, oh look there is the next hapless commuter ha!

 

I know I will end up paying the £80, I can't see a way around it but it does not make it right or correct it and attitudes like yours is typical of the TOC. You are accusatory, obstinate and tunnel visioned but hey it's not you money or values at stake.

[BulliedBySWT]

Honeybee, thanks for the reply and I appreciate it and the honesty.

I trust you're not a regular commuter as I carry a bag and most of my tickets go in and stay in, how much junk do women have in their bags! bad housekeeping if you may and I am one of those commuters you refer to, I see price hikes all the time. I have a Gold Card Season Ticket now I have cleared my employment probabtion period which i was in at the time (a GCST before that in my previous job too, so just in between season tickets).

 

And no, I value yours and everyones 'opinion' on here, it is an invaluable source and I am grateful. I apologise if my replies to firstclass etc seem terse but I thought this forum was for consumers and not the service providers!

[BulliedBySWT]

I think we have established they will go hell for leather to extort the money out of me and I will end up paying but can someone explain to me TO WHOM I owe the money to and have to pay it to? I have asked this of SWT twice and IRCAS, both of whom ignore the question completley! SWT simply said they couldn't communicate as its now a legal matter with IRCAS but are they not acting for SWT so I am bemused. SWT have a say yes/no and once I send payment to IRCAS where does it go, £20 to SWT, £60 IRCAS or fatcats or £80 to SWT? Essentially who do I fight on afterwards with! Who will have my money?

[BazzaS]

And no, I value yours and everyones 'opinion' on here, it is an invaluable source and I am grateful. I apologise if my replies to firstclass etc seem terse but I thought this forum was for consumers and not the service providers!

 

"but I thought this forum was for consumers and not the service providers!" seems quite at odds with "no, I value yours and everyones 'opinion' on here"

 

You've been advised to "pay up".

Clearly, you don't like that advice.

 

It doesn't make it bad advice though, or "good for the service provider, not good for the consumer" : I read it as good advice, intended to stop you facing a prosecution and then increased costs.

[BulliedBySWT]

Bazza, opinions are different to [edited] instructions. I wasn't advised to pay up it was more an instruction to since I 'broke' as opposed to was "in breach" of the byelaws: a distinct difference and that's what got my gall up. We are here; least I thought so; to help the consumer but the [edited] responses were simply to bow down to the service providers which is why I'm highly suspicious of the negative posters! I've even asked same questions I asked to SWT and IRCAS which I notice they've too conveniently not answered since it would only help me not the provider.

 

So therefore, yes clearly I don't the tunnel visioned advice as it falls 100% on service provider front, there is nothing useful to me to progress my case.

Edited September 14, 2013 by honeybee13
Pejorative terms.

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

I'm sorry you don't like the advice you've had, but please can we leave the value judgements out of it?

 

It's up to you if you take the advice or not, but if there is nothing that helps your case, it could be that there are no other options. Sometimes in life you have to choose your battles.

 

HB

[Grotesque]

As Napolean said at Austerlitz.

[BulliedBySWT]

Honeybee, I have already apologised if my replies were terse and it's not that I don't like the advice, Apart from Old-Cod-Ja who'se reply was well constructed and welcome, I just consider rest of the forum replies have only been to 'save' myself from a court appearance. Absolutely nothing, zip, about how to go about maybe contesting the extra unfair charges, whom to best take my complaint to or letter templates etc which I would have expected from fellow consumers, hence my suspicions.

It was never my intention to get drawn into a defensive argument but I couldn't sit back and be told I went out of my way to break the law and I have to pay up tough! when that was never the situation.

I am not going to post back anymore - except to say thank you to posts since I want be able to post other questions in future if needed without having an unwarranted 'reputation'.

Thank you to all for your time.

[BazzaS]

Bazza, opinions are different to [edited] instructions. I wasn't advised to pay up it was more an instruction to since I 'broke' as opposed to was "in breach" of the byelaws: a distinct difference and that's what got my gall up. We are here; least I thought so; to help the consumer but the [edited] responses were simply to bow down to the service providers which is why I'm highly suspicious of the negative posters! I've even asked same questions I asked to SWT and IRCAS which I notice they've too conveniently not answered since it would only help me not the provider.

 

So therefore, yes clearly I don't the tunnel visioned advice as it falls 100% on service provider front, there is nothing useful to me to progress my case.

 

Fair enough. It is only advice .

Feel free not to follow it if you choose.

 

Just then don't bleat about it if you have to pay even more +/- the criminal record you may receive as a result of not following the good advice you have called (the word the site automatically edits).

 

You have been given advice and within that advised of the risks : over to you.

[Old-CodJA]

Honeybee, I have already apologised if my replies were terse and it's not that I don't like the advice, Apart from Old-Cod-Ja who'se reply was well constructed and welcome, I just consider rest of the forum replies have only been to 'save' myself from a court appearance. Absolutely nothing, zip, about how to go about maybe contesting the extra unfair charges, whom to best take my complaint to or letter templates etc which I would have expected from fellow consumers, hence my suspicions.

It was never my intention to get drawn into a defensive argument but I couldn't sit back and be told I went out of my way to break the law and I have to pay up tough! when that was never the situation.

I am not going to post back anymore - except to say thank you to posts since I want be able to post other questions in future if needed without having an unwarranted 'reputation'.

Thank you to all for your time.

 

Having been away for some time and deliberately avoided 'the web' for a while, reading through this thread I think it important to note that the bottom line here is that IRCAS will not make the decision regarding prosecution.

 

I'm not going to suggest that 'BulliedbySWT' should take any particular action, but suggest a clear appraisal of what all the options are for both parties might help.

 

If the notice remains unpaid at the date IRCAS have notified for clearance of the outstanding sum advised to resolve the matter by civil remedy, they will advise SWT who may decide to cancel the notice and commence prosecution proceedings. The authority to do so is confirmed by the penalty fares rules.

 

The SWT prosecutor will have the choice of issuing a summons alleging the strict liability offence of 'Did fail to show a rail ticket on demand', which is contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005) and if convicted, carries a maximum penalty for a first offence of a fine at level 3 of the standard scale (max £1000), or issuing a summons alleging 'Did travel on a railway and did fail to show a valid ticket showing that his fare had been previously paid, with intent to avoid the fare due' contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act (1889).

 

The person who issued the notice will be required to make a statement confirming the evidence to support the case for prosecution.

 

The determined prosecutor might in fact apply for issue of separate summonses alleging BOTH charges.

 

The defendant may plead 'not guilty' to the charge of intending to avoid payment, stating that s/he had paid and had lost his/her ticket.

 

The defendant may produce a copy of a bank/card statement showing the claimed transaction.

 

The prosecution witness (the person who issued the notice) may be called to tell the Court exactly what s/he has reported and may be questioned on oath by the defence

 

The prosecutor may correctly point out that

 

i) such an entry, or receipt does not comply with the legal requirement to produce a ticket showing the fare has been previously paid,

ii) that the evidence of a bank statement does not show that a ticket for the specific journey made by any particular traveller was purchased

iii) that several opportunities to make the disputed payment have been given over a long period of time, but not taken up by the defendant.

 

The foregoing may not result in conviction for 'intent to avoid a fare', but there is a possibility that the prosecutor's argument (especially if eloquently put) may see the Magistrates persuaded to do so.

 

If that charge is either dismissed (or maybe withdrawn by the prosecutor) there remains the strict liability charge of breach of byelaw.

 

In such a case, all that the prosecutor needs to show is that the defendant did not show a ticket when asked to do so.

 

For the defendant, the clear defences to this charge are

 

i) 'Not me gov' I wasn't there'.........which needs proof of course!

ii) 'I did show a ticket'.............again with relevant evidence

 

The prosecutor may rebut these responses

 

i) by questioning the witness, convincing Magistrates that the defendant was present and did not show a ticket when asked

ii) by producing to the court the copy of the notice issued to the traveller showing that s/he signed it, confirming that s/he was issued the notice because s/he did not show a ticket when asked.

 

I have edited my earlier reply to add the following:

 

I have noted that you have thanked posters for their help, and understand you may be a little annoyed

 

Honeybee, I have already apologised if my replies were terse and it's not that I don't like the advice, Apart from Old-Cod-Ja who'se reply was well constructed and welcome, I just consider rest of the forum replies have only been to 'save' myself from a court appearance. Absolutely nothing, zip, about how to go about maybe contesting the extra unfair charges, whom to best take my complaint to or letter templates etc which I would have expected from fellow consumers, hence my suspicions. .

 

As a direct answer to your query about further complaint or appeal, I am afraid that if you have exhausted the PF appeal process the answer is that it is up to the TOC to decide what to do next.

 

If they proceed to issue a summons or summonses, then the final arbiter will be the Courts. The decision whether or not to take the matter there lies entirely with SWT.

Edited September 15, 2013 by Old-CodJA