Split Ticketing Notice of Intention to Prosecute.

[Haywain]

Out of interest, how do they treat people who arrive with an Oyster card at Luton Airport Parkway? I've seen RPIs being very fair to people on the train to Gatwick and just charging the fare from East Croydon (and also pointing out that the user will be charged a maximum cash fare).

I wonder if they do that at Luton too? I know this is a bit off topic btw.

Based on what I've seen, it is generally through Penalty Fares.

 

[Class377]

I consider split ticketing to be something of a trade-off; yes, your tickets are cheaper, but there are a number of conditions that go with it. You may sometimes have to get a slower train (so it calls at the split point) and you have to be more organised to get your tickets sorted. If you get to the station and there's just a ticket machine, you're obligated to buy a valid ticket for your journey. It really is simple and trying to be clever to save a couple of quid sometimes really isn't worth the hassle!

 

[island]

Out of interest, how do they treat people who arrive with an Oyster card at Luton Airport Parkway? I've seen RPIs being very fair to people on the train to Gatwick and just charging the fare from East Croydon (and also pointing out that the user will be charged a maximum cash fare).

I wonder if they do that at Luton too? I know this is a bit off topic btw.

Dartford, Gravesend, Sevenoaks and Swanley are regularly heavy issuers of penalty fares and I don't expect Luton Airport Pw to be much different.

 

[PermitToTravel]

For info, a repeal of a repealing provision does not revive the original wording - see s15 Interpretation Act 1978.

Plus be careful with Irish sources - they inherited Victorian legislation but are free to do what they like with it, which may differ from the position in the UK.

Thank you very much for that! We're back then to it being illegal by default, regardless of fraudulent intent, what the NRCoC says, or what happened at Blackfriars

The Irish source in question I believe is valid, as it purports to show that act as enacted

 

[Andrew1395]

Its not irrelevant its just a question I asked. I have offered no logic I just asked a question. One thinks you are reading into my question for your own purposes and you have expanded on that somewhat when there really was no need to, was there?

The right to use two or more tickets for a journey. Does that presume you have them altogether at the start of your journey? And the right to use two or more tickets, is that the same as a right to buy split tickets? Has it ever been tested?

 

[jon0844]

It would seem to be rather an obvious way to commit fraud by always claiming that you wanted to buy multiple tickets, but couldn't because a station with only a ticket machine might not be able to sell a ticket starting from another station.

You could then buy a ticket for one stop and then wait until you're caught and say 'I wanted to split my ticket'. Even if the combination cost more, you could try and claim it.

Therefore I don't think that would work.

I'd say that if you can't get the tickets you need, you'd need to buy a normal ticket and then write in to claim a refund for the difference and explain what you wanted to buy, but couldn't.

I suspect many people wouldn't fancy the hassle, and the smart ones would buy the ticket(s) on an app or a PC in advance and collect from a TVM, possibly earning some Nectar points or something similar.

If that didn't work, buy the first ticket then get off and buy the second - and complain, by asking why you couldn't get both in the first place.

Ultimately, TVMs should all sell tickets from any origin not just where you are. Let the revenue officers worry about catching people doughnutting.

 

[najaB]

The right to use two or more tickets for a journey. Does that presume you have them altogether at the start of your journey? And the right to use two or more tickets, is that the same as a right to buy split tickets? Has it ever been tested?

Without wanting to self-promote, you could take a look at this thread over in Travel Advice for discussion of those questions.

 

[PermitToTravel]

I'd say that if you can't get the tickets you need, you'd need to buy a normal ticket and then write in to claim a refund for the difference and explain what you wanted to buy, but couldn't.

But the TOCs are not under any obligation to refund you in this case

 

[jon0844]

Really? If you wanted a certain ticket combination, why couldn't you ask to be sold that combination retrospectively?

 

[PermitToTravel]

Because there's nothing forcing them to do so, unless a condition of your buying the tickets was that they later pay you and both parties enter into a contract accordingly

 

[Class377]

But arguably risking not being able to save your crucial couple of quid and get your split combination is a risk you take when you decide to split ticket every journey anyway? It's not a basic human right or anything, it's a simple trick to save some money by playing the system.

 

[jon0844]

Because there's nothing forcing them to do so, unless a condition of your buying the tickets was that they later pay you and both parties enter into a contract accordingly

It's an interesting argument, and one that perhaps needs to be tested at some point (see the other thread already linked).

If two tickets are cheaper than one ticket, why shouldn't you be entitled to buy them to travel? But if you can't get both before travel, what happens then? Should you need to be delayed by having to get off a train and buy the second ticket further on, or get the ticket at the end of the journey which is the 'first opportunity'?

It's a problem for the industry too, because of the potential for people to lie, that's for sure.

I suspect you'd find that if you did complain you'd not get a definitive answer and the TOC wouldn't ever dream of giving permission to buy later, but would 'on this occasion' give you some vouchers by way of a goodwill gesture - and say no more.

 

[gnik1]

Somebody on this thread mentioned that the train from Bearsted arrived at Blackfriers at 0703 that day when it was due at 0707, that would have meant that I jumped on the 0708 to Luton Parkway. There was no time to buy the ticket at Blackfriers without delaying myself.

Guards were not seen on either train. I tried to buy the other ticket at the first opportunity. Why have something that looks like an excess fare booth at Luton Parkway if you cannot use it? Surely they should block it up if you cannot use it. There is one at Victoria Station on platform 5 that is regularly used. Why is it all so inconsistent? If you wanted to deceive passengers and set a trap it would be a good way to do it.

What should I do to reduce the fine or whatever I am now to received for doing absolutely nothing wrong and trying to pay for a journey? I did not approach any barrier without a ticket. All I did was go to the fake excess fare slot.

 

[najaB]

Somebody on this thread mentioned that the train from Bearsted arrived at Blackfriers at 0703 that day when it was due at 0707, that would have meant that I jumped on the 0708 to Luton Parkway. There was no time to buy the ticket at Blackfriers without delaying myself.

And that is case closed against you. You can't argue that you would have been delaying yourself to get the 0723(?) service as that is the only one you could have planned to have got.

As it stands you had the opportunity to purchase a single ticket for your journey - you chose not to and got on your train without all the tickets you required. Then you had the opportunity to purchase a ticket at Blackfriars - you chose not to and boarded an earlier train than the one you had planned to.

You are at fault here, not the railway.

 

[gnik1]

Thanks for the post. It looks like an excess fare window. Why have excess fare stations like the one on platform 5 Victoria. It is all very inconsistent.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And that is case closed against you. You can't argue that you would have been delaying yourself to get the 0723(?) service as that is the only one you could have planned to have got.

As it stands you had the opportunity to purchase a single ticket for your journey - you chose not to and got on your train without all the tickets you required. Then you had the opportunity to purchase a ticket at Blackfriars - you chose not to and boarded an earlier train than the one you had planned to.

You are at fault here, not the railway.

OK I see what you are saying. It was just an opportunity to get to work early and not spend too long early in the morning, on a freezing cold station in late January. I really did believe that I could buy an excess fare on the train or at the station, but I accept that I am ignorant of the rules.

What sort of sanction can I now expect?

 

[Starmill]

But arguably risking not being able to save your crucial couple of quid and get your split combination is a risk you take when you decide to split ticket every journey anyway? It's not a basic human right or anything, it's a simple trick to save some money by playing the system.

I don't think so. Some journeys can only be made by 'splitting'.

 

[najaB]

I don't think so. Some journeys can only be made by 'splitting'.

I suspect that in 99.9% of those cases you have to change trains at your 'splitting' point and it is a staffed station.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What sort of sanction can I now expect?

Since you refused to pay the penalty fare, its likely that this will be passed for prosecution. You could try writing to Thameslink (?) to explain that you understand you were in the wrong, and that you would like to prevent them having to waste time, effort and money taking the matter any further. Ask them if you could compensate them for any costs they have incurred so far in lieu of presenting the case before the courts.

I can't remember, did the notice of intent to prosecute state exactly what you were being charged with?

 

[yorkie]

And that is case closed against you. You can't argue that you would have been delaying yourself to get the 0723(?) service as that is the only one you could have planned to have got.

As it stands you had the opportunity to purchase a single ticket for your journey - you chose not to and got on your train without all the tickets you required. Then you had the opportunity to purchase a ticket at Blackfriars - you chose not to and boarded an earlier train than the one you had planned to.

You are at fault here, not the railway.

I disagree. This is your interpretation of the rules. I do not share it.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I can't remember, did the notice of intent to prosecute state exactly what you were being charged with?

gnik1 hasn't told us yet, which is one reason for my not having offered any advice on this thread so far.
But I'll guess that the letter to which he's already replied didn't make that clear - though it might have quoted a few words from the relevant legislation within the text.
Fahad has suggested that it may be a S.103 offence under the RCCA but that is also guesswork.

As a reply to the company's investigation's team has already been sent, we don't have much opportunity to influence matters, despite the large volume of comment on here. I can foresee a potential flaw in a Prosecution (depending on which bits of evidence we've seen on here reach the bundle of Evidence) but until the matter reaches a pre-trial disclosure then there's not much that can be done.

 

[najaB]

I disagree. This is your interpretation of the rules. I do not share it.

Such is the nature of this case there is no clear, unambiguous source of guidance. I can follow your logic, but I don't agree with your conclusion.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

And that is case closed against you.
. . . .
As it stands you had the opportunity to purchase a single ticket for your journey - you chose not to and got on your train without all the tickets you required. Then you had the opportunity to purchase a ticket at Blackfriars - you chose not to and boarded an earlier train than the one you had planned to.
. . . . .

I disagree. This is your interpretation of the rules. I do not share it.

I'm sorry, but that remark has gone right over my head! Please help!
What 'rules' that are relvant to gnik1's circumstances have been 'interpreted' for him/her and which you disagree with?
The law on the circumstances described here seem quite clear to me, and I seem to have missed all the contentious bits!

I thought Flamingo and bb21 summed up all that there was to be said on the incidenct in the first page.

 

[yorkie]

I disagree with najaB's apparent claim that a person who has been denied access to the full range of tickets is not permitted to catch the next available service at their interchange station. Nowhere is it stated that a person should extend their journey, and if you believe someone should, then that's your opinion, not fact.

 

[Clip]

I disagree with najaB's apparent claim that a person who has been denied access to the full range of tickets is not permitted to catch the next available service at their interchange station. Nowhere is it stated that a person should extend their journey, and if you believe someone should, then that's your opinion, not fact.

As I said in the other thread though - how do you define a 'full range of tickets'? Does the TVM sell tickets to all destinations? If yes and it will offer railcards and group tickets then it has fully complied with it.

You know full well that the TVMs cannot sell the 'Full' range of tickets even the ones where you can buy starting at another destination so they will never comply with how you think it should so therefore the most logical and reasonable interpretation of 'Full range of tickets' are indeed those that are available solely from the starting point to destination.


ETA: In fact seeing as there are a lot of people being very pedantic about it then I would also say this that as long as the TVM sells Anytime, Super/Off Peak and periodical seasons and any rovers/rangers for the area(think Ive covered their ability here) then they have indeed had the 'Full range of tickets' available.

 

[Starmill]

As I said in the other thread though - how do you define a 'full range of tickets'?

All of the tickets that would be available at a ticket office.

You know full well that the TVMs cannot sell the 'Full' range of tickets even the ones where you can buy starting at another destination so they will never comply with how you think it should so therefore the most logical and reasonable interpretation of 'Full range of tickets' are indeed those that are available solely from the starting point to destination.

I'm confused. It seems quite clear to me what a 'full range of tickets' is. Yes I agree no ticket machine comes that close to selling it at present. So surely it's time to change that...?

 

[Clip]

All of the tickets that would be available at a ticket office.



I'm confused. It seems quite clear to me what a 'full range of tickets' is. Yes I agree no ticket machine comes that close to selling it at present. So surely it's time to change that...?

Yes the full range from the starting station to the final destination. Phew, Im glad we cleared that up as that's just what all(they should) TVMS do.

 

[Starmill]

But I have just put forward a suggested definition for this phrase, which doesn't seem to be covered by what your thoughts are on it?

Also, I'm afraid they don't. My go-to example is a Super Off-Peak Day Return from Manchester to Nottingham. I keep forgetting to check Nottingham's when I'm there but Manchester's don't issue them, neither do Stockport nor any of the local Northern stations that have these fares to Nottingham. Nor do any of the TVMs countrywide that I've tried to issue a ticket from an alternative origin. This could have a lot to do with it being a somewhat irregular ticket type.

 

[yorkie]

Flamingo asked an interesting question, asking for examples of journeys that can only be made by 'splitting'. I've 'split' this post into a new thread for discussion here: Trivia: Journeys that can only be made by using a combination of tickets?

 

[jkdd77]

Yes the full range from the starting station to the final destination. Phew, Im glad we cleared that up as that's just what all(they should) TVMS do.

TVMs do not usually sell all tickets valid from that station to the final destination. Most will not sell monthly (+) seasons, or rangers/ rovers valid from that station to the final destination.

In general terms, it seems absurd, perverse and unjust that the holder of an A to B season ticket who wishes to travel from A to C, on the last train of the day, would be effectively forced to buy an new A to C ticket rather than a valid B to C single simply because:
1) the TVM at A will not sell the B to C single, and;
2) he/she cannot risk not finding the guard, or the guard being unable to sell the B to C ticket, before the train arrives at, or passes through, B.

If a train passes through the point to which a ticket was notionally valid, without stopping at any intermediate stations beforehand, would the RCCA offence still apply, given that there is no opportunity to leave the train at that point?

 

[Agent_c]

TVMs do not usually sell all tickets valid from that station to the final destination. Most will not sell monthly (+) seasons, or rangers/ rovers valid from that station to the final destination.

In general terms, it seems absurd, perverse and unjust that the holder of an A to B season ticket who wishes to travel from A to C, on the last train of the day, would be effectively forced to buy an new A to C ticket rather than a valid B to C single simply because:
1) the TVM at A will not sell the B to C single, and;
2) he/she cannot risk not finding the guard, or the guard being unable to sell the B to C ticket, before the train arrives at, or passes through, B.

If a train passes through the point to which a ticket was notionally valid, without stopping at any intermediate stations beforehand, would the RCCA offence still apply, given that there is no opportunity to leave the train at that point?

IIRC when split ticketing, usually the train must call at the split point (and not be a set down / pick up only service).

 

[bb21]

IIRC when split ticketing, usually the train must call at the split point (and not be a set down / pick up only service).

jkdd77 is talking about a Condition 19(c) split, where the train does not need to call.