• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Admin charges? (Friend failed to buy a ticket at origin)

Status
Not open for further replies.

TomJ93

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2010
Messages
865
Talking to a friend who didn't buy a ticket between COV-LMS, couldn't get one onboard as the guard could not be found, and they're being prosecuted by a company called TIL operating on behalf of Chiltern Railways. They're charging an admin fee (£80 or so), with an alternative of leaving the case for 21 days and having it referred to a magistrates. Surely this should just have been a new ticket at LMS or a £20 charge? I have never heard of an admin fee being issued.

Any advice?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

londonbridge

Established Member
Joined
30 Jun 2010
Messages
1,896
£20 would be a Penalty Fare issued either on a train or at a ticket barrier.
The involvement of clerical manpower in the issue of a prosecution notice could not be expected to be free hence the admin charge
Your friend should have explained his situation at his arrival station and avoided the situation
 

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
24,830
If your friend boarded the train at Coventry, it's a pretty safe bet that they ignored a ticket buying opportunity. In the circumstances a byelaw prosecution should be successful.

I'm no expert on Penalty Fare areas, but I don't think that would be applicable for that journey. And in any event, passing an opportunity to purchase is not a mistake, for which PFs are issued.
 
Last edited:

Merseysider

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
22 Jan 2014
Messages
5,630
Location
Birmingham
charging an admin fee (£80 or so), with an alternative of leaving the case for 21 days and having it referred to a magistrates.

Looks like they've taken a leaf out of Northern's book.

Unless there are genuine grounds for appeal (eg no opportunity to buy ticket before boarding) payment of this fee would almost definitely be the most cost-effective way of resolving the matter.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,468
As CrossCountry do not operate a Penalty Fare scheme, a Penalty Fare would not have been applicable.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,913
Location
0036
When your friend chose not to buy a ticket before joining a train, he/she committed a criminal offence. As a more lenient option than being prosecuted, he/she is being offered the opportunity to pay towards the costs of detecting criminals.

Why didn't your friend buy a ticket, costing £4.60, at Coventry?
 

TomJ93

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2010
Messages
865
Late running bus left them no time to get a ticket.

I do understand when there is only 1tph between two fairly close locations, you do not want to wait an hour, especially when tickets are often available on the train (especially in the case of the LM COV-NUN).

What I do not understand is why they were not offered the chance to buy a ticket before being prosecuted and how can it cost more than the £20 penalty fare.

As the company have acknowledged in my friends letter- they are clean, no previous offenses, I appreciated in some cases that can be read as 'never been caught' but it's unfair to tar everyone with the same brush.

Would it not be a Civil offense Island?

What really puzzles me is the admin fee- they can charge whatever they feel with no real justification, especially as the only alternative is to take it before a magistrates leaving you only 21 days. Also because they were operating at LMS- does that mean it was on chilterns behalf and not XC's?
 
Last edited:

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,913
Location
0036
It is the passenger's responsibility to turn up at the station in good time to buy a ticket if he/she needs one. Failing to buy a ticket is indeed a criminal offence (and if the company can prove the person intended to avoid payment of the fare, it is a more serious offence which carries a criminal record; that may or may not apply here).

If the passenger in this case was travelling on CrossCountry, then it would not have been possible to issue a Penalty Fare, as bb21 indicated. Rail staff are under no obligation to sell a passenger a ticket or, even when possible, issue a Penalty Fare, if a passenger has chosen to walk past functioning ticket-selling facilities.

Your friend would be well advised to settle the matter at his/her earliest convenience to prevent it from escalating further. If he/she remains aggrieved, the issue can be raised with the relevant customer service department.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,483
Location
Yorkshire
What I do not understand is why they were not offered the chance to buy a ticket before being prosecuted and how can it cost more than the £20 penalty fare.
The out of court settlement can be any amount they wish, with the risk to the Company that if they set it too high, too many people will say "see you in Court" and they might not have the resources to prosecute so many people.

£80 seems fairly standard for relatively minor matters on the railway these days.
As the company have acknowledged in my friends letter- they are clean, no previous offences, I appreciated in some cases that can be read as 'never been caught' but it's unfair to tar everyone with the same brush.
Exactly the sort of person who is going to be keen to keep the matter out of Court and pay up.
Would it not be a Civil offense Island?
I doubt they would go for a Regulation of Railways Act prosecution, as they'd have to prove intent.

But they could still prosecute under the Byelaws, which is a non-recordable, strict liability criminal matter.
What really puzzles me is the admin fee- they can charge whatever they feel with no real justification, especially as the only alternative is to take it before a magistrates leaving you only 21 days.
That's correct they can ask for whatever they want and if a settlement isn't agreed, the Courts can decide.

You may find RailUK Fares & Ticketing Guide - Section 8 - Legal interesting & helpful.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,630
Location
Isle of Man
Just one question for the experts: can one TOC issue a prosecution on behalf of another one? Chiltern Railways have not experienced any financial loss in this situation as the OP did not travel on their service and nor do they operate any services between Coventry and Leamington Spa.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,308
Given that XC do not have station staff anywhere, (AFAIAA) it surely stands to reason that they'll have watertight agreements in place with the relevant station operators to take action under the Byelaws or RRA (but not Penalty Fare action) if people who've arrived on a XC train are found without tickets at human or automatic barrier lines?
 
Last edited:

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,329
Relevant facts-

Did your friend walk past an opportunity to buy a ticket at the start of the journey, yes or no?

That is it, all the rest is irrelevant because once they walked past that opportunity it ceased to be a mistake and became a deliberate act!

if your friend is not happy, dont pay and see if the magistrate agrees with them bearing in mind they will be dealing in facts and wont let any bluster into the case, the admin fee is not relevant to the case anyway. The end result is that your friend is guilty of walking past that ticket office/machine without buying a ticket and that is all the Court is interested in!

The offer of the admin fee is a way for your friend to keep this out of court and save everyone the aggro and your friend some money.

My advice is accept the offer and consider it lucky they are not in Court where it would probably cost them a lot more than £80.
 

CyrusWuff

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
5,475
Location
London
Whilst XC don't operate a PF scheme, Leamington Spa is a Compulsory Ticket Area, so I'd assume that any potential prosecution would be on the grounds of the passenger being present in same without a valid ticket, having started their journey at a station with ticket issuing facilities.

Depending on the answers given when questioned, they may try a RoRA prosecution if the only thing stopping the passenger from leaving the station without paying was the existence of the barriers at Leamington...though a Byelaw prosecution is more likely.

My personal take on the "Admin Fee" type notices is that they're similar to FPNs for speeding and the like, in that they allow the offence to be disposed of significantly cheaper than going to Court and being found Guilty.
 

TomJ93

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2010
Messages
865
Just a quickie as I'm on the bus (with a ticket!)

A quick example I've thought up, if I had a misplaced ticket in the same circumstances, I have no proof that I paid but I have not ignored opportunities to pay- but I would be treated the same way.

In regards to the matter at hand, I think the first time should be a slap on the wrist, if a genuine mistake you would be doubly as sure to have a ticket in advance- bare in mind many people believe tickets can be bought on board. If you were a repeat offender then you would show up on the records and a fairer penalty could be applied.
 

Islineclear3_1

Established Member
Joined
24 Apr 2014
Messages
6,594
Location
PTSO or platform depending on the weather
So the OP's friend boarded at Coventry without buying a ticket when there were facilities to do so.

Chiltern Railways have outsourced this to a debt collection agency (so to speak) to recover the cost of the fare.

This is therefore not a Penalty Fare (but the OP's friend understably thinks this is a "penalty"

The OP's friend has been told to pay £80 or go to court (and face possible prosecution)

Think I would pay the £80 and shut up....having got away with a lucky escape
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
Just one question for the experts: can one TOC issue a prosecution on behalf of another one?
Yes.
In practice, there are arrangements in place between some operators and they would only prosecute where those arrangements have been agreed. In theory, there is no impediment to a TOC bringing about a prosecution against a passenger travelling on another operator's services (or using another operator's stations), but then there is little incentive to do so either, as the prosecuting company only stands to recover its costs, and even that will always be subject to some uncertainty in advance of the Judgement.

An example where this would happen is in bringing forward a prosecution against a passenger who has been sustaining a persistent fraud at the expense of a number of operating Companies.
 
Last edited:

Anvil1984

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
1,514
Am I missing something here. The prosecution is not brought by Chiltern but by TIL which I presume is Transport Investigations Limited. Could be a case where the Chiltern staff have passed details to CrossCountry to prosecute as I know XC use TIL for their prosecutions
 

TomJ93

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2010
Messages
865
Am I missing something here. The prosecution is not brought by Chiltern but by TIL which I presume is Transport Investigations Limited. Could be a case where the Chiltern staff have passed details to CrossCountry to prosecute as I know XC use TIL for their prosecutions


Letter clearly states on behalf of CR, not XC. Would I be correct in saying they owe CR nothing or is it the fact they exited via CR's property means it is CR's responsibility?
 

Paul Kelly

Verified Rep - BR Fares
Joined
16 Apr 2010
Messages
4,235
Location
Reading
What I do not understand is why they were not offered the chance to buy a ticket before being prosecuted
The chance to buy a ticket was offered at Coventry! If I remember correctly, there is only one entrance to Coventry station and you can't help but pass a large and prominent booking office. Indeed, because of this you could probably successfully argue that simply entering Coventry station without stopping to buy a ticket demonstrates intent to avoid paying the fare due.

But I agree there is a serious problem with inconsistency that results in people not being aware of their obligation pay their fare at the first opportunity and instead thinking they can pay at an opportunity of their own choosing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Letter clearly states on behalf of CR, not XC. Would I be correct in saying they owe CR nothing or is it the fact they exited via CR's property means it is CR's responsibility?

I don't think it's really that relevant who is owed what; it's the fact that a criminal offence has been committed that's the main thing, and that money now needs to be paid to stop it proceeding to court.
 

maniacmartin

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
15 May 2012
Messages
5,438
Location
Croydon
I don't think it's really that relevant who is owed what; it's the fact that a criminal offence has been committed that's the main thing, and that money now needs to be paid to stop it proceeding to court.

Is there anything to stop XC bringing a case after CR have been paid off?
 

Paul Kelly

Verified Rep - BR Fares
Joined
16 Apr 2010
Messages
4,235
Location
Reading
Is there anything to stop XC bringing a case after CR have been paid off?

I have to say I was thinking the same thing. They wouldn't have the OP's friend's details though. I think we need someone more expert to comment on this...
 

TomJ93

Member
Joined
24 Apr 2010
Messages
865
I really don't think the punishment reflects the crime though. Another issue raised is that were there no revenue protection present at LMS anybody in the same situation would not have had to buy a ticket. Surely the guard could have inspected tickets during the journey of a 4/5 car train. If my friend had been changing trains they would have more than likely encountered a guard and bought a ticket as they had originally intended. I have done it before in a similar situation, turned up for the COV-NUN and had 30 seconds to catch the train, during the journey (I know it is a single car) the guard has come down and happily sold me a ticket. The rules are very black and white and it is great for those of us who are aware of it (i'm not saying ignorance to a rule renders it invalid) but many people still believe they are perfectly fine to buy on board- and why shouldn't they? If I had the choice right now between waiting an hour and risking not having a ticket I would happily hop on and seek the guard out. What happens when the guard is locked away in the rear cab?

As I've said before surely the railway should first seek the fare owed, refusal to pay that or repeat offence calls for a harsher punishment I agree, but a £4 or so fare not bought in advance suddenly they are expected to pay for what would be 20 journeys!

The penalty fare system does seem fare in these cases as a £20 slap on the wrist is deserved and the penalty/rules/expectations are very clear around stations. At what point does for example a casual user of the railways know that they are expected to buy in advance rather than from the guard? They could for example believe it operated like buses, the trams here have recently gone over to buy before you travel and they are making it abundantly clear with lots of posters whilst still providing you an opportunity to buy on board.

Recommending to pay and then chase it up would in my eyes not work. Is it not an admission of guilt?

If this were me and I had the money to take this to court- I think I would. Surely some sort of improvement is needed to prevent this happening to casual travelers?

Whilst I do appreciate your advice, without coming across offensive some are sounding as if you are on a high horse. Not everybody knows the rules, and as many have said time and time again they can be very confusing to interpret. I've spoken to a TOC and they were unsure if administrative fees could be applied- what does that say?
 

Paul Kelly

Verified Rep - BR Fares
Joined
16 Apr 2010
Messages
4,235
Location
Reading
IThe rules are very black and white and it is great for those of us who are aware of it (i'm not saying ignorance to a rule renders it invalid) but many people still believe they are perfectly fine to buy on board- and why shouldn't they?

I agree with this. The inconsistency is the big problem. In this case we have an intersection of three different TOCs with three different policies: Virgin at Coventry with their very lax approach to barriers, CrossCountry who have no penalty fares and generally are happy to sell Anytime fares on-board, and Chiltern who have lots of Driver-Only operated trains and a consequent much tougher approach at stations.
 

NSEFAN

Established Member
Joined
17 Jun 2007
Messages
3,518
Location
Southampton
TomJ93 said:
Whilst I do appreciate your advice, without coming across offensive some are sounding as if you are on a high horse. Not everybody knows the rules, and as many have said time and time again they can be very confusing to interpret. I've spoken to a TOC and they were unsure if administrative fees could be applied- what does that say?

"Admin charge" is code for an out of court settlement. I doubt it actually costs £80 to process the case. Asking for a high value settlement is not only a deterrent but also a way of extracting revenue from persistent fare evaders who rarely get caught. It's also a nice earner for the TOC as they are able to pocket a lot more compared to taking the case to court. The strict liability nature of the ticketing offence makes it even easier for the TOC and they are perfectly within their rights to carry on with this practice, as long as they stick within the rules (which can of course be changed).

What is unfair is the inconsistency in policy, as you've said. People may come to expect a particular practice only to be stung when travelling to a different region. Either penalty fares should be rolled out across the network or completely abolished. This would keep things simple and all passengers can expect the same rules for when they travel by train.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,468
We've been through this many times on the forum but I will just very quickly sum up what we already know from previous discussions:
  • You have no one else to blame than yourself if you do not plan enough time to arrive at the station to purchase a ticket before boarding;
  • If everyone who is caught is asked to buy a ticket first, there would be no incentive for anyone to buy a ticket before boarding;
  • Guards have far more important jobs to do than check tickets;
  • Guards are allowed to exercise discretion on encountering a ticketless passenger;
  • If you actively seek the guard out, you would probably stand a better chance of a favourable outcome;
  • Walking past an open ticket office can be interpreted as intent to avoid paying the correct fare - a charge if convicted will result in a criminal record, and this has been established in case law;
  • Even if in this case your friend is not charged with intent, a charge under the Railway Byelaws will highly likely succeed, with much more severe penalties than £80;
  • A Penalty Fare is not applicable in this case, so reporting the passenger for prosecution is the only remaining course of action should it be deemed unnecessary to exercise discretion on the spot;
  • Even train companies who operate a Penalty Fare scheme have cottoned onto the fact that a Byelaw prosecution could be much more productive financially than a Penalty Fare;
  • The law does not work on the basis of whether you think it is fair;

I think that about covers it. As you have admitted yourself, ignorance is no defence. While I agree that there is a certain amount of confusion amongst passengers, and the railway industry are partly to blame for that, your friend has no one else to blame but himself, unfortunately. The recommendation for him to pay up is based on the fact that the chance of success challenging a Byelaw prosecution is very low, and quite low if he is charged with intent, with much a much worse outcome, not to mention the psychological impact, so it is simply a course of action that makes most financial sense.

If you believe that something needs to be done about the inconsistency, this is neither the time nor place for it. Once this matter has been dealt with, you can then consider what the best course of action is to tackle this particular issue. Passenger Focus could be a starting point.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
I really don't think the punishment reflects the crime though.

Many perceive that failing to pay a fare that is only a couple of pounds means that there won;t be serious consequnces. That is an incorrect assumption!

Railway companies lose an awful lot of revenue through the non payments of fares, and it looks as though serious action is being taken by the industry to recoup some of that lost income.

Another issue raised is that were there no revenue protection present at LMS anybody in the same situation would not have had to buy a ticket.

Do you mean that people are only made to ticket if there are revenue staff at their origin station? That's clearly not the case, as many stations have no revenue staff at all, yet the majority of passengers manage to buy their ticket before boarding, either at the ticket office, via the machines or on the web.

Surely the guard could have inspected tickets during the journey of a 4/5 car train.

It's not always possible to do so, no. All that it needs is another problem needing to be dealt with, a long passenger enquiry or two, and the TM can't get through the train.

If my friend had been changing trains they would have more than likely encountered a guard and bought a ticket as they had originally intended. I have done it before in a similar situation, turned up for the COV-NUN and had 30 seconds to catch the train, during the journey (I know it is a single car) the guard has come down and happily sold me a ticket.

I am starting to read this as an 'it's everyone else's fault' approach. Sadly, the onus is on the passenger to purchase a ticket. No doubt the XC TM would also have been happy to sell a ticket, if they had managed to get through the train.

In these types of incident, even though there is no requirement to do so, it may be helpful; to try and find the TM on the XC train in order to prevent any unpleasantness at the station of arrival.

The rules are very black and white and it is great for those of us who are aware of it (i'm not saying ignorance to a rule renders it invalid) but many people still believe they are perfectly fine to buy on board- and why shouldn't they? If I had the choice right now between waiting an hour and risking not having a ticket I would happily hop on and seek the guard out. What happens when the guard is locked away in the rear cab?

This is where the sense of unfairness starts kicking in for me. There are too many different policies amongst all the TOC's. Some are perfectly happy to allow people to buy on board, and include discounted tickets in that, some will only offer undiscounted full price Anytime tickets, some will charge a penalty fare and others will officially or unofficailly try and charge an admin fee.

Ther eis no consistency at all, and things vary not only by TOC, but geographically too. I am not surprised that there is a lot of confusion, especailly as a minority of the public still think the trains are all run by British Rail!

As I've said before surely the railway should first seek the fare owed, refusal to pay that or repeat offence calls for a harsher punishment I agree, but a £4 or so fare not bought in advance suddenly they are expected to pay for what would be 20 journeys!

TOC's a re clearly trying to use the admin fee as a deterrent.

The penalty fare system does seem fare in these cases as a £20 slap on the wrist is deserved and the penalty/rules/expectations are very clear around stations.

But it isn't an effective deterrent to people who either deliberately avoid paying the fare, or only pay when challenged.

At what point does for example a casual user of the railways know that they are expected to buy in advance rather than from the guard? They could for example believe it operated like buses, the trams here have recently gone over to buy before you travel and they are making it abundantly clear with lots of posters whilst still providing you an opportunity to buy on board.

Everyone should be buying before boarding, except where there are no facilities to do so. The problem is that when people are travelling with a TOC that doesn't penalise this behaviour, it's natural to assume that there is no requirement to buy ahead of travelling, and that nothing will happen if you don't.

In fairness, though, in my area ATW have put posters all over the trains stating that passengers have to buy at the first opportunity, which includes on board the train if there were no facilities to do so at the station of boarding. I reckon, though, that most of the traveller son the trains never, ever, look at those posters!

Recommending to pay and then chase it up would in my eyes not work. Is it not an admission of guilt?

If it were me, I'd respond by apologising, saying I hadn't realised that there would be a problem buying on board with XC, and see what happens next.

If this were me and I had the money to take this to court- I think I would. Surely some sort of improvement is needed to prevent this happening to casual travelers?

I wouldn't recommend that solution!

Whilst I do appreciate your advice, without coming across offensive some are sounding as if you are on a high horse. Not everybody knows the rules, and as many have said time and time again they can be very confusing to interpret. I've spoken to a TOC and they were unsure if administrative fees could be applied- what does that say?

Northern Rail have been asking for money not to prosecute for a while now, seemingly with impunity.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,483
Location
Yorkshire
Another issue raised is that were there no revenue protection present at LMS anybody in the same situation would not have had to buy a ticket.
I'm not sure what you are saying here - can you clarify?

If your friend made a comment along the lines of "if there were no revenue protection staff present, I would not have bought a ticket" (sometimes the question is asked of the customer) then that evidence would greatly assist a prosecution. If that view was shared to the inspectors, it makes it all the more important to keep the matter out of court.

The rules are very black and white and it is great for those of us who are aware of it (i'm not saying ignorance to a rule renders it invalid) but many people still believe they are perfectly fine to buy on board- and why shouldn't they? If I had the choice right now between waiting an hour and risking not having a ticket I would happily hop on and seek the guard out.
I agree. And by seeking the Guard, you'd be unlikely to have a problem. The guard would be within their rights to insist on selling a full, undiscounted Anytime fare though. But there's still a risk, if the Guard is unable/unwilling to sell a ticket.
Whilst I do appreciate your advice, without coming across offensive some are sounding as if you are on a high horse. Not everybody knows the rules, and as many have said time and time again they can be very confusing to interpret.
I will PM you about this, but I think it's fair to say that no-one has done anything but give the best possible advice for your friend.

I've spoken to a TOC and they were unsure if administrative fees could be applied- what does that say?
It says that many railway staff, particularly Customer Services staff, don't have detailed knowledge of such matters. Some of us only do because we've had so many cases on here. This is probably the best place to get such advice.
 

cjmillsnun

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2011
Messages
3,275
If this were me and I had the money to take this to court- I think I would. Surely some sort of improvement is needed to prevent this happening to casual travelers?

You would lose. The rules are very clear. Buy a ticket before you travel. They have been so since the very first passenger railways in this country.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,943
Location
UK
Maybe his friend will still want to take it to court though, in which case Flamingo is going to need to buy some more popcorn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top