FCC intent to prosecute - was travelling with Southern

[siren57]

Hi there,

I've searched the forums but couldn't find anything similar - apologies if this has been covered before!

I've received a notice of intention to prosecute from FCC. Though I usually purchase tickets daily, I was in a rush and didn't have time to do so on the day in question. Fair play; I know travelling without permit is a strict liability offence and so no excuses.

Upon alighting at my station I was accosted by FCC RPIs who have since issued me with the notice of intent to prosecute. My claim to dispute is not in the form of an excuse because I was in a rush, but because I was travelling on a Southern Rail service that day. I find it somewhat strange that a private company can prosecute me when not in receipt of their services.

I never use FCC trains - are they within their remit to issue such a severe penalty when I am not a paying customer? The legal threat is based on the satement that “First Capital Connect has a zero tolerance approach to fare evasion on our network”.

If Southern officers had been there instead, I would simply have been served a fixed penalty. Consequently this seems like nothing more than extortion - I couldn't take legal action against someone for trespassing on my neighbour's lawn, could I?

Also bearing in mind that this is my first offence aside from one penalty when I was 12. Stupid? Yes. Fraudulent? No.

Is this reasonable grounds for dispute?

Thanks for reading - any advice or assistance appreciated.

 

[maniacmartin]

If Southern officers had been there instead, I would simply have been served a fixed penalty.

Not necessarily. Southern RPIs could have chosen report you for prosecution instead if they wished. Penalty Fares are intended for genuine mistakes only.

Consequently this seems like nothing more than extortion - I couldn't take legal action against someone for trespassing on my neighbour's lawn, could I?

Many Train Operating Companies have reciprocal arrangements so that they can do this. As an aside, FCC may have lost revenue even if you travelled on Southern due to the way that ticket revenue is divided up between multiple companies that operate on shared routes.

The trespassing example isn't analogous in my opinion as this would usually be a civil case, whereas the railway prosecutions are criminal. I believe that anyone can technically bring a criminal prosecution to court, even if they are not the "victim".


What legislation does the letter refer to? Railway Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act?
Did the origin and destination station both have ticket purchasing opportunities which you ignored?
Did you pass a ticket office at the destination before being stopped by the inspectors?
Were you asked something similar to "If I haven't have stopped you, would you have purchased a ticket?", and if so, how did you reply?

 

[jon0844]

They can do it, and regularly do. Other TOCs do the same and there are usually arrangements and and agreements to police networks other than their own, especially at stations operated by another TOC than the one you might be travelling with.

Now, I would say that you wouldn't expect FCC RPIs to be on a Southern train - or on a line/station that isn't served by FCC, but clearly Southern and FCC share a lot of the same network and stations - so I wouldn't bother trying to use this as a defence.

Ultimately, you had no ticket and so that's it - as you've already acknowledged. Strict liability, no excuses and therefore an out of court settlement if you can, for £100+.

 

[siren57]

The trespassing example isn't analogous in my opinion as this would usually be a civil case, whereas the railway prosecutions are criminal. I believe that anyone can technically bring a criminal prosecution to court, even if they are not the "victim".

Oops, you're right, not the best example - civil v. criminal - kind of realised that just after I'd posted.

What legislation does the letter refer to? Railway Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act?

It doesn't refer to any unfortunately, which is somewhat disconcerting.

Thanks for your help. I'm guessing the best option in this case would be to aim for an out of court settlement?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ultimately, you had no ticket and so that's it - as you've already acknowledged. Strict liability, no excuses and therefore an out of court settlement if you can, for £100+.

Thanks for your reply Jon, great help.

Would I be best off offering an out of court settlement for a fixed amount? Or just state I'm willing to accept an OOC settlement and let them put a figure forward?

 

[cuccir]

I think the usual thing to do is to offer to pay the fare and any administrative costs incurred to date, after which FCC will respond with an amount.

 

[revenueadvice]

FCC RPI's can issue penalty fares for east mids, southwestern, south eastern , southern, greater anglia as well as FCC. If you have contravened a railway bye law then you can be reported for prosecution by an FCC inspector.

 

[soil]

Where did this take place, and where had you travelled from?

As I understand it *I* could prosecute you for fare evasion, it's a private prosecution, and legal for me to do so as much as anyone else, so you can't really complain about FCC going after you.

 

[jon0844]

Would I be best off offering an out of court settlement for a fixed amount? Or just state I'm willing to accept an OOC settlement and let them put a figure forward?

I'd say wait until they give you the offer. You might otherwise appear arrogant (by expecting to settle out of court) or offer to pay too much! I think we all know they'll seek to keep it out of court as they get more money that way but don't let them know you know that!

 

[LexyBoy]

I agree that FCC are within their rights to prosecute. It's likely they would use the Byelaws:

A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.

An "authorised person" could be staff of any TOC, or of a company employed by them for these purposes.

I think the best advice is that from jonmorris0844 and cuccir. FCC are notorious for bringing prosecutions in a lot of cases where there is no evidence of intentional fare evasion (though I'm sure there will be posts accusing you of this), and they seem to be after more cash rather than bringing wrongdoers to justice. From threads here it appears that the majority of cases are settled out of court.

BTW, I assume you have compared the cost of daily tickets with that of a Season ticket (available as weekly, annual, or any period of your choosing from a month to a year).

 

[siren57]

Cheers for everyone's help.

BTW, I assume you have compared the cost of daily tickets with that of a Season ticket (available as weekly, annual, or any period of your choosing from a month to a year).

Not really an option as my place of work varies, unfortunately. Rail system in this country is so unforgiving and inflexible - privatisation has worked really well, hasn't it!

 

[soil]

Cheers for everyone's help.


Not really an option as my place of work varies, unfortunately. Rail system in this country is so unforgiving and inflexible - privatisation has worked really well, hasn't it!

It may be an option, if you could give details of your travel - there may be a ticket or tickets that will cover you for all your workplaces at a lower cost than daily tickets.

 

[siren57]

It may be an option, if you could give details of your travel - there may be a ticket or tickets that will cover you for all your workplaces at a lower cost than daily tickets.

Thanks for that, I'll do some research.

Route is usually going into London Victoria, getting off at either Victoria itself (~once a week) or an earlier terminal. Roughly once a week I will also be on a SW service to Waterloo.

 

[LexyBoy]

Route is usually going into London Victoria, getting off at either Victoria itself (~once a week) or an earlier terminal. Roughly once a week I will also be on a SW service to Waterloo.

Whereabouts earlier? You don't say where you are starting your journey either.

Obvious options would be a [your station]-London Terminals ticket, which would be valid to Victoria and Waterloo (or Waterloo East) as well as any stations on any Permitted Route (which we can confirm once we know where you're travelling from), or alternatively a [your station]-[intermediate station] which could be extended to travel into London as required.

(Perhaps better to start a new thread to discuss ticket options though, to avoid going too much off topic).

 

[Darandio]

Rail system in this country is so unforgiving and inflexible - privatisation has worked really well, hasn't it!

Not really sure what the point is there?

You didn't buy a ticket, it's strict liability and would be no different either pre or post privatisation.

 

[Tibbs]

Not really sure what the point is there?

You didn't buy a ticket, it's strict liability and would be no different either pre or post privatisation.

If you want to understand, try reading his entire post before jumping in.

This was a response to a post made by Lexyboy (that the OP even quoted!) suggesting a season ticket may prevent this sort of error in future.

 

[LexyBoy]

Not really sure what the point is there?

You didn't buy a ticket, it's strict liability and would be no different either pre or post privatisation.

I think OP's point was on the (perceived) inflexibility of ticketing, requiring them to buy daily tickets, as well as the (perceived) harsh penalties for making mistakes.

And pre-privatisation it would not have been a strict liability offence AFAIK - the Byelaws date from 2005 and before that legal proceedings would use the Regulation of the Railways Act 1889. Or more likely in this case a Penalty Fare, which is what they were introduced for.

(IMO the issue here is the heavy-handed approach taken by FCC in consistently threatening prosecution; plenty of other countries with nationalised systems have heavy penalties for making mistakes but these are generally done through official means, rather like our Penalty Fares system).

 

[Darandio]

Fair enough.

Although the post/pre privatisation point would still stand even on the issue of tickets.

 

[soil]

I think OP's point was on the (perceived) inflexibility of ticketing, requiring them to buy daily tickets, as well as the (perceived) harsh penalties for making mistakes.

And pre-privatisation it would not have been a strict liability offence AFAIK - the Byelaws date from 2005 and before that legal proceedings would use the Regulation of the Railways Act 1889. Or more likely in this case a Penalty Fare, which is what they were introduced for.

(IMO the issue here is the heavy-handed approach taken by FCC in consistently threatening prosecution; plenty of other countries with nationalised systems have heavy penalties for making mistakes but these are generally done through official means, rather like our Penalty Fares system).

There have long been railway byelaws, but in their current form I believe they date back indeed post privatisation 1993 rather than 2005.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The 1965 Byelaws that are relevant to ticketless travel are not that different from today's equivalent.

The Railway Byelaws date back to the 19th Century and judgements arising from them may still be relevant. See London, Brighton & South Coast Railway Co v Watson (1879), Saunders v South Eastern Railway Co (1880), R. v Frere (1855) and Egginton v Pearl (1875).

 

[soil]

The 1965 byelaws appear quite different in that you could not be prosecuted for mere ticketless travel. (Dishonest avoidance is still proscribed under the 1889 Act).

The relevant byelaw, Byelaw 3, carried no financial penalty, only the threat of removal from the railway
http://ukrailwayfaq.wikispaces.com/Railway+Byelaws

The 1993 Railways Act allowed for private TOCs to create their own bye-laws, and it was here I think that the financial penalty was introduced for ticketless travel..

 

[Airlink]

FCC RPI's can issue penalty fares for east mids, southwestern, south eastern , southern, greater anglia as well as FCC. If you have contravened a railway bye law then you can be reported for prosecution by an FCC inspector.

Only if it is issued on the relevant TOC's penalty fare pad/paperwork. In otherwords they've got to carry a pad for each individual TOC. If you travel on a different TOC to the RPI's TOC, then appeal and you will win!

 

[Flamingo]

Only if it is issued on the relevant TOC's penalty fare pad/paperwork. In otherwords they've got to carry a pad for each individual TOC. If you travel on a different TOC to the RPI's TOC, then appeal and you will win!

Your source for this is?

 

[Urban Gateline]

Your source for this is?

That's also the first time I've heard of it, from experience of RPI's working alongside me, Penalty fares have been issued to people travelling on different TOC's, mainly Southern though as the LOROL Penalty fare scheme is completely different and not useable by other TOC RPI's!

 

[455driver]

Your source for this is?

it came to him in a dream!

 

[W230]

Only if it is issued on the relevant TOC's penalty fare pad/paperwork. In otherwords they've got to carry a pad for each individual TOC. If you travel on a different TOC to the RPI's TOC, then appeal and you will win!

Erm...no. Sounds like one of those 'urban myths' to me that has its origins in "Police force A can't give you a ticket in Police force B's area unless they have their tickets...".

 

[sarahj]

I told a FCC RPO about this post, they had a good laugh.

 

[Monty]

Only if it is issued on the relevant TOC's penalty fare pad/paperwork. In otherwords they've got to carry a pad for each individual TOC. If you travel on a different TOC to the RPI's TOC, then appeal and you will win!

This is completely untrue I'm afraid..

 

[Airlink]

This is completely untrue I'm afraid..

Think you'll find it is true.

FGW RP staff do not issue P/F to SWT passengers and vice versa.

You should know as appeals are handled by different bodies. Who have informed us that if any person lodges an appeal as a result, they'll win.

For instance if someone travels from Didcot Parkway to Ascot (via Reading), SWT would only issue P/F from Reading. Why do you think that is then?:roll:

 

[island]

I think the truth might be somewhere in between. For example, Southern and Southeastern Authorized Collectors at London Bridge issue Penalty Fares to each other's passengers and to FCC passengers as well.

 

[ian959]

Think you'll find it is true.

FGW RP staff do not issue P/F to SWT passengers and vice versa.

You should know as appeals are handled by different bodies. Who have informed us that if any person lodges an appeal as a result, they'll win.

For instance if someone travels from Didcot Parkway to Ascot (via Reading), SWT would only issue P/F from Reading. Why do you think that is then?:roll:

At a guess because FGW does not have an arrangement with SWT? Which is an entirely different situation to the OPs where FCC does have an arrangement with Southern... the clue being in your own words. Of course an appeal will win if their is no arrangement between the TOCs. It will fail if there is an arrangement between the TOCs.