Unpaid penalty fare (lost ticket) *SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME*

[maverickj]

Hi all,

 

I was just wondering if anybody here would be able to help.

 

Back in November I traveled from my home in Sittingbourne to London Cannon Street as I missed my regular train to London St Pancras. I showed my ticket at Sittingbourne and took the train to Cannon Street. When I got to Cannon Street I realised that my ticket was not in my wallet and was not with my photocard. I spent some good time looking for the ticket and could not find it anywhere.

 

The ticket inspector at Cannon Street gave me a penalty fare and told me to appeal with a duplicate ticket (he told me I would get one easily) then it would be fine. Never at any time did I refuse to pay for a ticket on the spot then get it refunded. For the rest of the month I had to buy tickets and get them refunded, so this would not of been an issue.

 

I went straight to Farringdon Station (where I buy my ticket) to get a duplicate, I had to fill in a form and told to wait 7 working days for a duplicate. I went back a week later and was told the form had been lost and that I would have to fill out another one. I then went back again to get a duplicate ticket but was told that they were unable to print a duplicate as the ticket was about to run out.

 

This left me pretty stuck with the appeal, but luckily my ticket was recovered and I sent in proof (photocard/travelcard). My appeal was rejected as it did not come within 21 days, I sent another letter fully explaining the above but I am yet to hear back from them.

 

In the mean time I have spoken to Passenger Focus who have been in touch with South Eastern who have rejected my appeal, the reason? Just because they can... The helpful man from Passenger Focus is now doing what he can and trying to speak to the prosecutor.

 

I was just wondering would I have any legs to stand on in court? If I am to ring up today I will have to pay £103 (up from £43). I am so against paying this amount as firstly, I cannot afford to and secondly, I had already paid £537.

[firstclassx]

Hi all,

 

I was just wondering if anybody here would be able to help.

 

Back in November I traveled from my home in Sittingbourne to London Cannon Street as I missed my regular train to London St Pancras. I showed my ticket at Sittingbourne and took the train to Cannon Street. When I got to Cannon Street I realised that my ticket was not in my wallet and was not with my photocard. I spent some good time looking for the ticket and could not find it anywhere.

 

The ticket inspector at Cannon Street gave me a penalty fare and told me to appeal with a duplicate ticket (he told me I would get one easily) then it would be fine. Never at any time did I refuse to pay for a ticket on the spot then get it refunded. For the rest of the month I had to buy tickets and get them refunded, so this would not of been an issue.

 

I went straight to Farringdon Station (where I buy my ticket) to get a duplicate, I had to fill in a form and told to wait 7 working days for a duplicate. I went back a week later and was told the form had been lost and that I would have to fill out another one. I then went back again to get a duplicate ticket but was told that they were unable to print a duplicate as the ticket was about to run out.

 

This left me pretty stuck with the appeal, but luckily my ticket was recovered and I sent in proof (photocard/travelcard). My appeal was rejected as it did not come within 21 days, I sent another letter fully explaining the above but I am yet to hear back from them.

 

In the mean time I have spoken to Passenger Focus who have been in touch with South Eastern who have rejected my appeal, the reason? Just because they can... The helpful man from Passenger Focus is now doing what he can and trying to speak to the prosecutor.

 

I was just wondering would I have any legs to stand on in court? If I am to ring up today I will have to pay £103 (up from £43). I am so against paying this amount as firstly, I cannot afford to and secondly, I had already paid £537.

 

At this particular time I haven't got the energy to go into much detail, but:

 

1) Pay up straight away

2) If you want to, fight it after you've paid.

 

You're sitting on a ticking bomb right now that's going to lead to a rather unhappy day in court for you.

[timbo58]

Basically it's a strict liability offence the way I see it: you couldn't produce a valid ticket when asked to do so by an authorised person.

 

It's a simple yes or no offence -no mitigation.

Pay up before it gets any higher I am afraid.

[maverickj]

You would surely thing this is a system to crack down on criminals and not to squeeze more money out of people who pay thousands a year on trains.

[BazzaS]

You would surely thing this is a system to crack down on criminals and not to squeeze more money out of people who pay thousands a year on trains.

 

Except that penalty fares are an alternative to a criminal prosecution.

 

Pay the penalty fare +/- then appealing it.

If your appeal is successful you are no worse off.

 

If you don't pay the penalty fare within it's timescale (regardless of any appeal) : then it might be made from a civil matter into a criminal prosecution by the TOC

[maverickj]

Thanks for all your "help" guys.

 

The prosecutor dropped the case today after the amazing help from Neil at Passenger Focus.

 

See, if you fight the system sometimes you can win. Do not always sit back and let these companies take advantage. I am a season ticket holder who pays thousands a year for my train fare, I am happy that this has come to a conclusion.

 

If I paid the fine like you guys told me to, then I would be £100 down.

[andydd]

Glad you had a happy outcome an its a pity some of the advice was unhelpful, remember guys this is a consumer help forum and we should all try and offer advice and help if we can, now clearly there are cases where people are fighting hopeless cases and its wise to tactfully point this out in order to save them money, but I don't believe that is the case here.

 

Ill change the title to show your happy outcome.

 

I recently had a run-in with my local TOC and found Passenger Focus helpful and completely at odds with the TOC whose replies I found most unhelpful.

[andydd]

Except that penalty fares are an alternative to a criminal prosecution.

 

Pay the penalty fare +/- then appealing it.

If your appeal is successful you are no worse off.

 

If you don't pay the penalty fare within it's timescale (regardless of any appeal) : then it might be made from a civil matter into a criminal prosecution by the TOC

 

Not true..Penalty fares are issued to anyone who cannot show a ticket, a criminal prosecution would only be successful if the TOC can show that the passenger was deliberately trying to avoid the fare, something which clearly wouldn't of happened in this case as the OP could show he purchased a ticket.

[BazzaS]

Not true..Penalty fares are issued to anyone who cannot show a ticket, a criminal prosecution would only be successful if the TOC can show that the passenger was deliberately trying to avoid the fare, something which clearly wouldn't of happened in this case as the OP could show he purchased a ticket.

 

That MIGHT be a defence to a S5.3 RRA prosecution for the original fare, in that the OP clearly didn't intend to avoid their original fare.

I think it is bad advice, though, as:

 

1) They might prosecute the OP under Bylaw 17 or 18, failing to show a ticket on demand (which they clearly didn't show on demand), and this is a strict liability offence, so the lack of intent is irrelevant.

2) I doubt there is any chance of a S5.3 prosecution for the original fare, but

3) While it is unlikely they would prosecute under S5.3 RRA 1889 for failing to pay the penalty fare, IF they did they would be able to show intent to avoid paying the PENALTY fare, which is a fare that has become due, rather than having the court look at the intent to avoid the original fare.

 

Glad you had a happy outcome an its a pity some of the advice was unhelpful, remember guys this is a consumer help forum and we should all try and offer advice and help if we can, now clearly there are cases where people are fighting hopeless cases and its wise to tactfully point this out in order to save them money, but I don't believe that is the case here.

 

Ill change the title to show your happy outcome.

 

I recently had a run-in with my local TOC and found Passenger Focus helpful and completely at odds with the TOC whose replies I found most unhelpful.

 

See below for why (although you disagree) I still believe the advice was appropriate and not "unhelpful".

The OP was advised on the lowest risk approach that removed risk of prosecution completely while still allowing the TOC to withdraw or the penalty fare appeal to succeed.

 

As at least one of the site team is now unilaterally deciding to label appropriate advice, that has had its rationale explained, as "unhelpful", with no further explanation from them : it is no longer worth me (in future) investing time in offering my opinion (as a reasoned and qualified opinion) on such threads.

 

As for:

Thanks for all your "help" guys.

 

The prosecutor dropped the case today after the amazing help from Neil at Passenger Focus.

 

See, if you fight the system sometimes you can win. Do not always sit back and let these companies take advantage. I am a season ticket holder who pays thousands a year for my train fare, I am happy that this has come to a conclusion.

 

If I paid the fine like you guys told me to, then I would be £100 down.

 

I'm glad the TOC saw sense. Bearing this in mind, it seems likely that any appeal would have succeeded.

It would have been 'safer' to pay and appeal and remove ANY possibility of prosecution.

Same outcome, but with no possibility of prosecution, which is why it remains "help", and at the end of the process you wouldn't be "£100 down"

 

Still, don't take my word for it, you can check Citizen's Advice page

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/travel_leisure_and_food_e/consumer_transport_e/consumer_public_transport_e/consumer_trains_e/appealing_against_a_train_penalty_fare.htm

who note that payment of the fare and appeal are seperate, and advise paying it and then appealing.

 

In particular, they note "If you refuse to pay the penalty fare, the train company also has the right to switch from dealing with the Penalty Fare through the civil courts to prosecuting you for a breach of byelaws in the Regulation of Railways Act 1889. If you're convicted, you'll get a criminal record."

 

Why take the chance?

 

Again, snide comments regarding "help" when (in fact) help (and explanation) was offered aren't likely to endear people to offer their opinion (with explanation).

 

Say the TOC hadn't backed down and gone for a Bylaw 18 prosecution due to the penalty fare not being paid : You'd have a criminal record. Unfairly, for sure, but the Magistrates can, at best, ask the TOC prosecutor "are you sure you wish to proceed"?. If a prosecutor insisted on proceeding, the bench can't look at if it is fair or not until sentencing ; for determination of guilt they have to look at the law, and a ticket wasn't shown on demand....... hence guilty is the only verdict they can reach if the TOC had decided to go for a Bylaw 17 or 18 prosecution.

[andydd]

Some good points. I note that S17 & S18 both fail to use losing a ticket as a valid reason, I believe in this case it would be unlikely to lead to a prosecution IF the traveller could show that he did indeed purchase a ticket and that he had proof, lets not forget that the staff did inform him that a duplicate could be obtained and it appeared that he followed that route. Luckily discretion is often shown and most TOC/Judges are not dumb enough to follow the letter of the law blindly, the fact that the TOC dropped the case shows this is the case.

 

He also would of complied with S17/S18 (1) as he had a ticket when he boarded the train.

 

I still believe that the advice wasn't really 'helpful' , both responses above were very short and amounted to not much more than simply 'pay up', with no real further help or explanation.

 

I myself have been issued Penalty Charges over the years and upon appeal every one had been withdrawn, on one occasion I was also issued compensation and an apology by the TOC CEO and Head of Revenue protection.

[maverickj]

BazzaS, do you honestly believe that any money will actually be refunded by this company? I am under firm believe that if you pay the fine you will not get your money back, I have been told this by a few individuals too

[andydd]

A good article here > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/10-ways-to-avoid-penalty-fares-on-trains-6762684.html which appears to contradict the claim that non payment of a penalty fare leads to it becoming a criminal offence.

 

"9 Remember: penalty fares are a civil, not a criminal-matter.

 

Train companies often scare people into paying up by threatening prosecution and a criminal record. However, the legislation establishing penalty fares, the Railways Act 1993, section 130, states that apart from failing to give your right name and address, "nothing in this section creates, or authorises the creation of any [criminal] offence". The Penalty Fares Regulations 1994 state that "the recovery of a penalty fare is a civil debt". So even if after reading your letter the company still decides it wants the money, it has to sue you - probably not worthwhile for such a small sum.

 

Railway companies sometimes threaten people with the main criminal law against fare-dodgers, the Regulation of Railways Act1889. But this says there has to be "intent to avoid payment". You could argue that you haven't intended to avoid payment because you have, in fact, paid the full single fare."

[andydd]

BazzaS, do you honestly believe that any money will actually be refunded by this company? I am under firm believe that if you pay the fine you will not get your money back, I have been told this by a few individuals too

 

I'd offer to pay the full single fare which is often less than the penalty fare and appeal this.

[BazzaS]

Some good points. I note that S17 & S18 both fail to use losing a ticket as a valid reason, I believe in this case it would be unlikely to lead to a prosecution IF the traveller could show that he did indeed purchase a ticket and that he had proof, lets not forget that the staff did inform him that a duplicate could be obtained and it appeared that he followed that route. Luckily discretion is often shown and most TOC/Judges are not dumb enough to follow the letter of the law blindly, the fact that the TOC dropped the case shows this is the case.

 

He also would of complied with S17/S18 (1) as he had a ticket when he boarded the train.

 

I still believe that the advice wasn't really 'helpful' , both responses above were very short and amounted to not much more than simply 'pay up', with no real further help or explanation.

 

I myself have been issued Penalty Charges over the years and upon appeal every one had been withdrawn, on one occasion I was also issued compensation and an apology by the TOC CEO and Head of Revenue protection.

 

Who mentioned Bylaw 17/18(1)?.

 

The strict liability offence highlighted was not handing over a ticket for inspection on demand ... Bylaw 17(2) or 18(2), not 17(1) or 18(1).

 

firstclassx noted they didn't have the energy to reply as fully as they usually do so. I don't know their personal circumstances, but since "time was of the essence", it isn't unreasonable of them to offer brief advice, noting why it was briefer than usual, rather than not replying.

 

 

(Minor nitpick, BTW, it is e.g. Byelaw 17(1), not S17(1). )

[BazzaS]

A good article here > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/10-ways-to-avoid-penalty-fares-on-trains-6762684.html which appears to contradict the claim that non payment of a penalty fare leads to it becoming a criminal offence.

 

"9 Remember: penalty fares are a civil, not a criminal-matter.

 

Train companies often scare people into paying up by threatening prosecution and a criminal record. However, the legislation establishing penalty fares, the Railways Act 1993, section 130, states that apart from failing to give your right name and address, "nothing in this section creates, or authorises the creation of any [criminal] offence". The Penalty Fares Regulations 1994 state that "the recovery of a penalty fare is a civil debt". So even if after reading your letter the company still decides it wants the money, it has to sue you - probably not worthwhile for such a small sum.

 

Railway companies sometimes threaten people with the main criminal law against fare-dodgers, the Regulation of Railways Act1889. But this says there has to be "intent to avoid payment". You could argue that you haven't intended to avoid payment because you have, in fact, paid the full single fare."

 

There is NOTHING to stop a TOC, when a penalty fare remains unpaid, from withdrawing it and substituting a prosecution.

That prosecution could be under Bylaw rather than S5 RRA 1889.

The penalty fare scheme still remains a civil matter, the prosecution still remains a criminal matter ; them doing this wouldn't somehow make the Penalty Fares scheme become a criminal matter.

 

Provided they laid the Bylaw 17/18(2) prosecution within 6 months ..... they would be within time to withdraw the penalty fare and proceed with prosecution

[BazzaS]

BazzaS, do you honestly believe that any money will actually be refunded by this company? I am under firm believe that if you pay the fine you will not get your money back, I have been told this by a few individuals too

 

Depends. They MIGHT have refused your appeal based on you not appealing in time.

 

Still, it worked out for you.

 

I still think you didn't take the "safest" route, but that was your choice.

If I was asked the same again, by a friend, I'd offer them the same advice as I've offered you on this thread for the reasons I've given.

 

Best advice remains : take it seriously, pay attention to the appeal timescales (you note your appeal was 'out of time').

 

I suppose it depends how much one is willing to risk the small chance of it going to a Bylaw 17(2) or 18(2) prosecution....

[Old-CodJA]

A good article here > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/10-ways-to-avoid-penalty-fares-on-trains-6762684.html which appears to contradict the claim that non payment of a penalty fare leads to it becoming a criminal offence.

 

"9 Remember: penalty fares are a civil, not a criminal-matter.

 

Train companies often scare people into paying up by threatening prosecution and a criminal record. However, the legislation establishing penalty fares, the Railways Act 1993, section 130, states that apart from failing to give your right name and address, "nothing in this section creates, or authorises the creation of any [criminal] offence". The Penalty Fares Regulations 1994 state that "the recovery of a penalty fare is a civil debt". So even if after reading your letter the company still decides it wants the money, it has to sue you - probably not worthwhile for such a small sum.

 

Railway companies sometimes threaten people with the main criminal law against fare-dodgers, the Regulation of Railways Act1889. But this says there has to be "intent to avoid payment". You could argue that you haven't intended to avoid payment because you have, in fact, paid the full single fare."

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately this article from many years ago has been misquoted, or misunderstood many hundreds if not thousands of times since it was first published.

 

The idea that the article contradicts the claim that non payment of a penalty fare leads to it becoming a criminal offence is absolutely incorrect as thousands of travellers, who have failed to successfully appeal and have not paid Penalty Fare Notices and now have a criminal conviction have discovered to their cost since the principle came into existence in 1989.

 

The Penalty Fares (Railways) Rules make specific provision for BR in the early days, and now any TOC involved to cancel any unpaid PFN and proceed to issue a Summons alleging an offence of failing to pay the fare due if done within 6 months of the Notice being incurred.(This also applies to UFNs).

 

The statement of fact that can be put to the Court in such a case will be along the following lines:

 

'At XX.XX hours on the date specified M. XXXX did fail to show a valid rail ticket when asked by an authorised person and was issued a notice requiring full payment within 21 days or successful dispute of liability within the same timescale. M. XXX signed agreeing that he understood the notice and was handed a copy giving details of where to pay or appeal and when that appeal should be made by. M. XXXX did not appeal/successfully appeal liability and has not paid the rail fare due. The fare remains outstanding'

 

The TOC may charge a 'strict liability' offence by alleging that;

 

M. XXXX did fail to pay his fare before travelling contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.1 (2005),

or

 

M.XXXX did fail to show a rail ticket when asked contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005),

 

or,

may allege intent to avoid payment by saying that;

 

M.XXXX travelled on a railway on XX.XX.XXXX without previously paying the fare due with intention to avoid payment thereof contrary to Section 5.3.a of the Regulation of Railways Act [1889] and when presenting that charge the Prosecutor will advise the Court that M.XXXX was handed a notice requiring payment, that the company has sent him two written reminders and that the fare remains outstanding

 

From personal experience I can attest to hundreds of successful prosecutions that have followed this process

 

That said, I'm pleased for the OP that a belated appeal was successful in this case.

[andydd]

It's a very sad state of affairs if a toc is willing to prosocute a traveller when he had bought a ticket and he had proof that a ticket was purchased he just couldn't find it when he reached the barrier which is what some appear to be saying here.

 

Let's not forget that tocs don't putely exist to prosicute legitimate travellers these same people are also customers of the company a fact that appears to be sometimes overlooked, it's good that the toc saw sense in this occasion.

 

I still find it hard to believe that s toc would withdraw a penalty fare in a similar situation and go ahead with prosecution even when the traveller could prove a ticket was legitimately purchased.

 

As some may know I have followed up when I have been treated poorly by toc staff with reasonably satisfactory results including as mentioned apologies and compensation, these cases are posted on the forum if anyone wishes to find them. I glad the op followed a similar route and I again thank passenger focus who I too found very helpful and certainly more helpful then the toc.

[BazzaS]

It's a very sad state of affairs if a toc is willing to prosocute a traveller when he had bought a ticket and he had proof that a ticket was purchased he just couldn't find it when he reached the barrier which is what some appear to be saying here.

 

Care to quote who is saying that?

I think that is in error (a bit like you introducing Bylaw 17/18(1) to make your point, when the discussion was on Bylaw 17/18(2) . I'm not saying that or this was deliberately introduced to mislead, just that that and this is mistaken).

 

Traveller buys ticket. Traveller looses same.

Traveller gets UFN or PFN.

 

Here is where things can diverge:

Traveller has signed for PFN, accepting they have 21 days to pay or appeal.

Traveller finds ticket (in OP's case) or gets duplicate or otherwise sends proof in, and appeals.

Appeal succeeds (hopefully) before the 21 days or

Traveller pays the PFN, and appeal succeeds and they get their money back,

Or appeal doesn't succeed and traveller goes to Passenger Focus & then gets their money back.

 

However, an alternate scenario:

Traveller doesn't appeal within the set time frame (which they signed they were aware of, or at least accepted the conditions of the PFN).

The TOC might prosecute : not to punish the traveller for loosing their ticket, but because they didn't show a ticket, accepted a PFN, and then didn't pay it before it was due.

 

The OP feels had they paid the TOC wouldn't have given the money back.

I'd argue that their position involving Passenger Focus would have been even stronger with the circumstances identical and having paid (when the appeal was denied) than going to Passenger Focus (as they did) once the appeal was denied and having not paid.

 

 

Let's not forget that tocs don't putely exist to prosicute legitimate travellers these same people are also customers of the company a fact that appears to be sometimes overlooked, it's good that the toc saw sense in this occasion.

 

I still find it hard to believe that s toc would withdraw a penalty fare in a similar situation and go ahead with prosecution even when the traveller could prove a ticket was legitimately purchased.

 

As some may know I have followed up when I have been treated poorly by toc staff with reasonably satisfactory results including as mentioned apologies and compensation, these cases are posted on the forum if anyone wishes to find them. I glad the op followed a similar route and I again thank passenger focus who I too found very helpful and certainly more helpful then the toc.

 

I agree that common sense should prevail.

 

As noted above it wouldn't have been loosing the ticket that put the OP at risk, but not following the appeals process of the PFN in time, and /or not paying the PFN and then appealing to the TOC or going to Passenger Focus while outside of the PFN's "time to pay"

 

I'm all for educating the travelling public

A) There is no absolute right to "board first, pay later",

B) if offered a UFN or PFN, take it and appeal rather than risking one not being offered and a report being made

C) if you want to appeal a PFN or UFN, make sure you understand the rules of the scheme (especially any appeal periods) to maximise your chance of success.

[Old-CodJA]

It's a very sad state of affairs if a toc is willing to prosocute a traveller when he had bought a ticket and he had proof that a ticket was purchased he just couldn't find it when he reached the barrier which is what some appear to be saying here.

 

Let's not forget that tocs don't putely exist to prosicute legitimate travellers these same people are also customers of the company a fact that appears to be sometimes overlooked, it's good that the toc saw sense in this occasion.

 

 

The fact that TOCs recognise the value of customers is not really in dispute although it is worth noting that the law in these cases never uses that word in referring to the person identified. In all legislation it refers to a 'traveller' or 'passenger'.

 

I still find it hard to believe that s toc would withdraw a penalty fare in a similar situation and go ahead with prosecution even when the traveller could prove a ticket was legitimately purchased.

 

 

There are perfectly valid reasons why the law supports the process, but I am not going to go into them in detail here for the simple reason that it is not the purpose of this, or any other forum that I am aware of, to give others ideas about how they can manipulate the system to avoid paying the correct fare.

 

I am sorry if anyone is offended by that and I am sure that someone will point out that a fare had been paid, but before doing so it's worth noting that those ideas rely on exactly the fact that a fare has been paid and both the enforcement teams and Courts are well aware of this.

 

 

As some may know I have followed up when I have been treated poorly by toc staff with reasonably satisfactory results including as mentioned apologies and compensation, these cases are posted on the forum if anyone wishes to find them. I glad the op followed a similar route and I again thank passenger focus who I too found very helpful and certainly more helpful then the toc.

 

I deal with Passenger Focus very regularly and whilst that organisation has no authority to instruct any TOC to do anything, they do perform a very useful function in taking all the exaggeration, aggressiveness and other emotion out of responses that are frequently the norm when a traveller contacts the TOC after being reported.

 

This makes it very much easier to assess the issues fully and to come to a mutually acceptable decision in such difficult cases.

 

In my experience Passenger Focus fully support the rule of law and the need to deal with fare evasion and opportunist ticketless travel and do understand and support the processes that are in place to effect such actions. I have been present when senior PF staff have stated so very publicly.

 

Mistakes are made, none of us are infallible and if the exchanges between traveller and TOC become emotionally charged any dispute may be difficult to resolve. I am not saying that this happened in this particular case, but sometimes it is so difficult to communicate that the TOC just may fall back to the strict liability requirement that every passenger 'must show a ticket when asked' to be in compliance with National Railway Byelaw 18.2. I am not saying this is always morally acceptable, but it is legally permitted and a good prosecutor will demostrate why it can be justified.

 

Before someone accuses me of being insensitive, or too pro-TOC, that's not a reaction that I would ever automatically support, but we all have to recognise that sometimes we just have to take responsibility for our own actions, whether intended or not.

 

Once again, I unreservedly confirm that in this particular case, I am pleased that it worked out well for the OP