Need a lot of help with this "Intention to Prosecute"

[XanderCrews]

I was travelling from Cricklewood to St Albans, I don't travel by train at all but had to for an interview. I was under the assumption that I was able to travel using my oyster card.
When I arrived at cricklewood station i promptly touched in, with my oyster card which had over £7 credit on it, on the available oyster card reader at the station. It was accepted and I boarded the train to St Albans.
Upon my arrival at St Albans I wished to leave the station, however I noticed there were no oyster card readers on the barriers.
I then approached a steward and enquired how I could leave the station as there were no readers on the barriers. She told me that it was not possible to use my oyster card at St Albans and that I should have a railcard. She used a hand held reader to check the oyster card I used which was now around -90 pence, and confirmed that I had boarded the train at cricklewood. She then said that there was a £20 pound fine for not having a railcard.
I was asked to pay it there and then and said I that I was unable to pay at that specific point in time as I only had £5-10 left in my account.
She then said that I would have to fill out an MG11 form which required me to fill out such details as my name address and the reason for not having a rail card. For this I wrote that I didn't know that I couldn't use my oyster card. The steward asked me what time I was coming back to the station as she would fill out the time and hand me a stub on the bottom of the MG11 form, but as I told her I didn't know what time I was returning she said that she could not hand me the stub, but she told me that when I return I should tell another steward what happened and what form I filled out and they would let me through the barriers and I could return to cricklewood, which they did. I then enquired about the fine and she told me that I would receive a letter in the post and that I should wait for it and respond to it, and then allowed me through the barriers.
A few weeks later I received a letter which stated that they had the intent to prosecute for failing to produce a valid rail card.

Does anyone know why I didn't receive a "Penalty Fare Notice" at all?
Is it negligence on their part for not giving me directions as to how I could pay the £20 fine at a later date (i.e. not there and then at the station?)
What is my best course of action?
Could I settle this out of court?
Could I have a successful resolution in court?..(one that does not involve me getting a criminal record for this).

Thank you in advance to whoever reads this.

 

[yorkie]

I was travelling from Cricklewood to St Albans, I don't travel by train at all but had to for an interview. I was under the assumption that I was able to travel using my oyster card.
When I arrived at cricklewood station i promptly touched in, with my oyster card which had over £7 credit on it, on the available oyster card reader at the station. It was accepted and I boarded the train to St Albans.
Upon my arrival at St Albans I wished to leave the station, however I noticed there were no oyster card readers on the barriers.
I then approached a steward and enquired how I could leave the station as there were no readers on the barriers. She told me that it was not possible to use my oyster card at St Albans and that I should have a railcard. She used a hand held reader to check the oyster card I used which was now around -90 pence, and confirmed that I had boarded the train at cricklewood. She then said that there was a £20 pound fine for not having a railcard.
I was asked to pay it there and then and said I that I was unable to pay at that specific point in time as I only had £5-10 left in my account.

You had a Railcard discount loaded onto your Oyster card, but you were not carrying your Railcard with you? In that case a Penalty Fare is chargeable in such circumstances.

Although you do not have to pay the whole Penalty Fare due immediately, you do have to pay the standard fare from Cricklewood to St Albans, with the remainder due at a later date. If you are unable to pay the fare then they do have the option to prosecute instead.

She then said that I would have to fill out an MG11 form which required me to fill out such details as my name address and the reason for not having a rail card. For this I wrote that I didn't know that I couldn't use my oyster card.

That wasn't answering the question, as there are two entirely separate issues here:

• You were allegedly holding a Railcard discounted Oyster card, but without a Railcard to support it;
• You were allegedly using Oyster PAYG for a journey outside the Oyster PAYG area.

The steward asked me what time I was coming back to the station as she would fill out the time and hand me a stub on the bottom of the MG11 form, but as I told her I didn't know what time I was returning she said that she could not hand me the stub, but she told me that when I return I should tell another steward what happened and what form I filled out and they would let me through the barriers and I could return to cricklewood, which they did. I then enquired about the fine and she told me that I would receive a letter in the post and that I should wait for it and respond to it, and then allowed me through the barriers.
A few weeks later I received a letter which stated that they had the intent to prosecute for failing to produce a valid rail card.

Does anyone know why I didn't receive a "Penalty Fare Notice" at all?

You were initially charged a Penalty Fare, but you were unable to pay the minimum amount and therefore they were unable to issue it, and are going down the path of prosecution instead.

Is it negligence on their part for not giving me directions as to how I could pay the £20 fine at a later date (i.e. not there and then at the station?)

No. You do not have to pay the whole £20 fare, but you do have to pay part of it. In this case, that would be £8.20 (edit: sorry quoted wrong fare earlier)

What is my best course of action?
Could I settle this out of court?

I cannot say what the "best" course of action, but you certainly could inform FCC of your willingness to reach an out of court settlement. For more information, look for the term "settlement" in this thread (only the references to lower case settlement are applicable)

Could I have a successful resolution in court?..(one that does not involve me getting a criminal record for this).

Possibly. Do you have a lot of money spare to be properly represented in Court? If so I cannot personally recommend a solicitor but I can pass on details of a solicitor who has had success with FCC in other cases and has been recommended to me.

 

[district]

A penalty fare notice are issued for people who make genuine mistakes, but members of staff are not obliged to offer this. The member of staff writing an MG11 out sounds like she believes that a penalty fare is not appropriate, and you should be reported for prosecution.

You can either be prosecuted under the Railway Byelaws or the Regulation of Railways Act. You may not know which one until you receive the letter, which may take a few weeks.

Railway Byelaws: This is a 'strict liability' matter, meaning you do not have to have any intention of defrauding the railways, the fact that you did not present a valid ticket when requested means you have broken the byelaws. Byelaw convictions aren't recordable though, so you will not receive a criminal record.

Regulation of Railways Act: This is a more serious matter, and conviction will mean a criminal record. However it has to be proven that you intended to defraud the railways.

When you receive the letter you may be asked to state what happened from your side - you need to be careful what you write to avoid incriminating yourself further. Some members of this forum may be willing to help with this.

You may be able to persuade the train operating company to settle out of court. Generally, this means you will need to pay the full fare, costs and compensation. However, they may be unwilling to do this and proceed to court.

There is very little you can do in the meantime until you receive the letter, so try not to worry too much. I know this is easier said than done.

 

[bb21]

A Penalty Fare is for when someone makes a mistake. It was offered to you but you did not have any money to pay it. If you paid the single fare on the spot then the rest of it can be paid within 21 days, however you did not have enough money even for that (£8.20). As a result, you were referred for prosecution because you did not have enough money to pay for your journey.

To answer your question, they were not negligent because you could not fulfill your obligation. It was not appropriate to offer you a Penalty Fare because you could not afford to pay even the minimum required (£8.20 for your journey).

I don't know how you thought that you could go all the way from Cricklewood to St Albans and back on £7 even if Oyster were valid.

You had a Railcard discount loaded onto your Oyster card, but you were not carrying your Railcard with you? In that case a Penalty Fare is chargeable in these circumstances.

I understand the words railcard to mean a National Rail ticket.

 

[district]

I understand the words railcard to mean a National Rail ticket.

I drew this conclusion also.

 

[yorkie]

I understand the words railcard to mean a National Rail ticket.

That is possible.

XanderCrews - were you informed that you were travelling without a railcard or was an alternative term used?

 

[soil]

OP, you made an error in travelling without a valid ticket (the Oyster card was not valid beyond Elstree & Borehamwood). At this point you were guilty of an offence, but you were offered to pay a £20 Penalty Fare (not fine) to resolve it. You obstructed the guard by claiming to have no funds to pay the fare, and then further refusing to give a time when you would be back at the station to resolve the issue. Having spurned three opportunities to buy a valid ticket, they understandably had enough, and you are now looking at a prosecution situation.

At this point your best option is to offer to settle out of court, which, rather than £20, is likely to cost you closer to £100.

 

[XanderCrews]

Thank you all for the comments and advice.

Yorkie, to the best of my recollection the steward used the term railcard.

Soil, I'm not sure that it makes much difference, but I told the steward that I would be back in the afternoon around 2 o'clock but I could not give an exact time as I did not know when my interview would finish. She told me that she needed an exact time to be able to hand me the stub.

I agree that the best option would ask them to settle outside of court, but how likely is it that FCC will agree a settlement based on the event that took place?

 

[W230]

I don't know how you thought that you could go all the way from Cricklewood to St Albans and back on £7 even if Oyster were valid.

My thoughts too. Without wanting to sound harsh, I know times are hard for many at the moment (especially when between jobs) but would it not have been wise to leave your house with some money or is the tenner you have in the bank all you have to your name?

It's sadly going to cost a lot more money now.

 

[island]

Can someone explain what the references to railcards are about as I am confused! Or are railcard, ticket, and Oyster card being thrown around interchangeably?

And as above, it seems hard to believe that you had just £7 on an Oyster card, "£5-£10" in your bank account, and presumably no cash whatsoever, but were (a) expecting to get to St Albans and back and (b) unable to pay the single fare of £8.20.

 

[telstarbox]

The RPI appears to have said "railcard" to mean a NR paper ticket (perhaps meaning a Travelcard) as opposed to an Oyster card.

 

[6Gman]

The RPI appears to have said "railcard" to mean a NR paper ticket (perhaps meaning a Travelcard) as opposed to an Oyster card.

If RPIs can't use the correct terminology then there's not much hope for the public is there?

 

[bb21]

Thank you all for the comments and advice.

Yorkie, to the best of my recollection the steward used the term railcard.

Soil, I'm not sure that it makes much difference, but I told the steward that I would be back in the afternoon around 2 o'clock but I could not give an exact time as I did not know when my interview would finish. She told me that she needed an exact time to be able to hand me the stub.

I agree that the best option would ask them to settle outside of court, but how likely is it that FCC will agree a settlement based on the event that took place?

It doesn't matter what the RPI said to a certain extent.

Do you have a Railcard?
Does your Oyster card have a Railcard discount loaded?

This information will help us to figure out what is going on and in turn help you. Provided that it is your Oyster card, I am sure these questions are not too difficult to answer.

 

[swt_passenger]

Do you have a Railcard?
Does your Oyster card have a Railcard discount loaded?

If he has, then this bit of the original post is a bit suspect surely?

I don't travel by train at all but had to for an interview.

 

[Airlink]

The Revenue Protection member of staff, I feel was in the wrong. You can't decide to go from a PF to an MG11, purely because soembody can't pay the £20 there and then. This sounds like a member of staff who can't be bothered to take names and addresses and just wants full payment everytime.

Passengers don't generally tap-in on oystercards and get charged about £7, if they are attempting to avoid £8 fares. The OP seems to have made a genuine mistake. The way I read it is, that they could have paid the minimum fare, but were choosing not to due to not realising they had to if it's demanded.

Oystercards, the bain of my working life!

 

[bb21]

The Revenue Protection member of staff, I feel was in the wrong. You can't decide to go from a PF to an MG11, purely because soembody can't pay the £20 there and then. This sounds like a member of staff who can't be bothered to take names and addresses and just wants full payment everytime.

He did not change his mind because the OP could not pay the Penalty Fare there and then. He (probably) changed his mind because the OP did not have sufficient money to even pay the minimum required, ie. the single fare of £8.20, which could be construed as a sign of a fare evader.

The RPI is entitled to change his mind.

Passengers don't generally tap-in on oystercards and get charged about £7, if they are attempting to avoid £8 fares. The OP seems to have made a genuine mistake. The way I read it is, that they could have paid the minimum fare, but were choosing not to due to not realising they had to if it's demanded.

This is an irrelevant argument. The fare will be incorrectly charged because the passenger could not follow the instructions and will probably go to the wrong company so why should FCC not be entitled to prosecute for the loss? It is not as if the validity area of Oyster is difficult to find. It is displayed at almost every station (if not all) inside London.

The minimum fare is not designed as a mechanism to rid passengers of their responsibility.

(That is before getting into the realms of those people who then ring up Oyster helpline and obtain a refund complaining about the system not registering the touch-out, or those that make a quick return journey so as to not exceed the maximum journey time. The possibility is endless. I am not accusing the OP of doing so, however revenue protection people (Edit: at FCC) will not be looking at it in a way you prefer.)

 

[Airlink]

He did not change his mind because the OP could not pay the Penalty Fare there and then. He (probably) changed his mind because the OP did not have sufficient money to even pay the minimum required, ie. the single fare of £8.20, which could be construed as a sign of a fare evader.

The RPI is entitled to change his mind.

You're entitled your opinion, just as I am to mine. We are both answering as we see things.

However I'm an RPI, as such we work from an MG11 downwards not up. Only reason I can see for going from a P/F to MG11 is for false details and that doesn't appear to be the case here. Perhaps the member of staff should have got all the necessary information they needed before jumping for the easy option of "It's going to cost you a £20 penalty fare, how do you wish to pay?" I've seen it far too many times to mention.

 

[bb21]

Maybe your company have a different (more passenger friendly) policy. FCC don't if some of the threads on this forum are to be believed. While it would be nice if the RPI could have given the OP the benefit of doubt (and I have no reason not to believe that he was not aware that he could not use Oyster at St Albans), I don't think there are obvious grounds for complaint.

Unfortunately for the OP, he was caught by an FCC RPI.

 

[Urban Gateline]

However I'm an RPI, as such we work from an MG11 downwards not up. Only reason I can see for going from a P/F to MG11 is for false details and that doesn't appear to be the case here.

Hmm, I work for the same TOC as you I believe, and I am disappointed by this attitude. Surely if you can see that a passenger is attempting to avoid payment of the fare then you would go straight for an MG11? If this is the case then accept my apologies please!

I can see the reason for working upwards though as the passenger having used Oyster for not an overly lengthy journey could have been dealt with by just a Penalty fare, but as BB21 says it is the fact that they could not even pay the minimum towards the Penalty Fare than can be construed as attempting to avoid payment of the fare due, hence the move towards an MG11!

 

[Monty]

You're entitled your opinion, just as I am to mine. We are both answering as we see things.

However I'm an RPI, as such we work from an MG11 downwards not up. Only reason I can see for going from a P/F to MG11 is for false details and that doesn't appear to be the case here. Perhaps the member of staff should have got all the necessary information they needed before jumping for the easy option of "It's going to cost you a £20 penalty fare, how do you wish to pay?" I've seen it far too many times to mention.

There is nothing wrong with withdrawing the option to issue a penalty fare notice if it becomes known to you that the passenger had no funds in which to pay for his original fare in the first place. All you have to say is "This is no longer a penalty fare matter".

The amount of times I would come across passengers who claimed to be 'running for the train' and they were going pay at the 'other end' or even 'come and find me one the train', only to then say they had no monies on them to pay when I even hinted at a PFN.. I'm sorry, but my PF pad gets put away and my notebook comes out. I had no problem with issuing nil paid PFNs, but if the chap or chapette had no funds at all then it's simply not a penalty fare matter.