Prosecution for travelling outside Oyster PAYG area (St Albans)

[lpdanno]

Hi there. Apols if this is a common q, but couldn't find any threads in search.

Quick(ish) summary :

Travelled from Herne Hill to St Albans a few months back. Didn't have my usual 1&2 season ticket as daughter was in hospital having heart surgery.

Topped up PAYG with £20 so had +/- £35 on card. Train is the one I use every day, albeit I travel HNH-ZFD.

Got to St Albans, no barriers to tap out. Approached staff member to see if they had a validator. He says he's charging me £20 PF.

I explained circumstances. Requested to pay fare from previous PAYG stop (I thought this reasonable given I would be charged +/- £8.80 for not touching out). He refused.

I requested to pay full return fare from origin. He refused.

He said I needed to pay £20 PF. After approx 15mins of conversation I asked him if there was a way not to pay and to inconvenience his company as he was refusing all my reasonable requests. He said to fill in the form and he'd open the barrier. I could expect a letter in the post.

Thought nothing much more of it until I received a Wonga-esque legal letter alluding to prison sentences, confiscation of goods, suspended sentences and maximum fines etc. I was very angered given the same letter is presumably sent to vulnerable members of the public.

Anyway, I sent off an angry response, but kept to the facts. I appear in court next week and am interested to hear from anyone that may have had success in defending themselves this sort of situation.

TL: DR? Appearing in court for "fare evasion" when station didn't have facility to accept my form of ticket (PAYG Oyster). Honest error. Any advice?

 

[Clip]

Well if you have a court date set for next week there's little to assist you really but you need to speak to them ASAP to see if they will settle out of court which will cost you a few hundred pounds maybe.

If you had accepted the £20 penalty fare you wouldn't have to go through this as they were correct for wanting to issue it to you.

In future wherever you travel using Oyster please check to see if it contained within the zones so this doesn't happen again.

Ill see if I can find some previous threads for further advice for you.

 

[najaB]

Appearing in court for "fare evasion" when station didn't have facility to accept my form of ticket (PAYG Oyster). Honest error. Any advice?

Would you expect to pay using Oyster PAYG in Edinburgh or Exeter? You were outside the Oyster area so your card had no validity at all.

 

[island]

You were 100% in the wrong and he was completely entitled to charge you a penalty fare, which is the normal way to deal with passengers who make an honest error. When you chose not to pay that, and decided that you wished to "inconvenience his company", you were quite properly reported for prosecution. The Oyster area is very well advertised and Oyster cards are not valid north of Elstree & Borehamwood. You would have needed a paper ticket.

Advice? Depends on (1) what offence you're being charged with, and (2) whether you're concerned about having a criminal record.

The likely offence might be travelling on the railway without having previously paid your fare and with intent to avoid the payment thereof contrary to section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, or failing to hand over a ticket for inspection contrary to section 18 of the Railway Byelaws. Do either of those appear on your court documentation?

 

[lpdanno]

I get the ticket wasn't valid, but my intention was not to avoid a fare. I asked to pay the fare (either from the last PAYG stop or for the whole journey) and was refused on all occasions. It was kinda exceptional circumstances given my 2yr old had life-threatening surgery that week.

The guy I spoke to was absolutely horrible, which led me down that route of refusing. He did not explain the potential outcome of deciding not to pay on the spot. Obviously had I known my liability was going to increase so disproportionately I would have paid the PF and appealed subsequently.

I don't believe my liability is now beyond a couple of hundred pounds, but I was hoping to see if anyone out there had similar situations, not whether, by the letter of the law, I had "done wrong".

Incidentally, the PAYG network on Oyster is not clear at all. It would appear entirely arbitrary to a user of the network why Elstree & Borehamwood or Watford Junction have the facility to take Oyster, but not St Albans. Why would they not have a validator if the expense of barriers is too much?

At Farringdon there is a sign saying on the platform "Oyster cards are not accepted beyind E&B", but there's nothing like that at my origin.

Surely it's incumbent upon someone providing a product to give absolute clarity, or at least a modicum of common sense when faced with a genuine mistake.

 

[Tetchytyke]

TL: DR? Appearing in court for "fare evasion" when station didn't have facility to accept my form of ticket (PAYG Oyster). Honest error. Any advice?

Oyster is not valid for use north of Elstree and Borehamwood, and there are prominent maps inside every single Thameslink carriage to advise you of this, as well as maps at every station showing the limits of Oyster validity.

Therefore you did not have a ticket for travel to St Albans, therefore the Penalty Fare was correctly issued.

The RPI repeatedly attempted to explain this to you, and you let your temper get the better of you. The Penalty Fare was the RPI showing "common sense" to correct your mistake. You chose to ignore this and this is the consequence of your action.

You've now dug yourself a very big hole because you lost your temper. Thameslink may agree to an out-of-court settlement at this stage, but expect it to cost well north of £100. If it goes to court, you probably won't get much change out of £500.

 

[bb21]

I get the ticket wasn't valid, but my intention was not to avoid a fare. I asked to pay the fare (either from the last PAYG stop or for the whole journey) and was refused on all occasions. It was kinda exceptional circumstances given my 2yr old had life-threatening surgery that week.

The issue of a Penalty Fare is the correct procedure unfortunately, as it is intended for someone who made a mistake and was not suspected of deliberate fare evasion.

I sense that you were probably outraged at being charged this, I am therefore not surprised that the matter escalated.

While I understand that it is a stressful time for you, I don't think you can lay the blame at someone else for travelling without a valid ticket.

The guy I spoke to was absolutely horrible, which led me down that route of refusing. He did not explain the potential outcome of deciding not to pay on the spot. Obviously had I known my liability was going to increase so disproportionately I would have paid the PF and appealed subsequently.

I have yet to hear one person charged with a Penalty Fare claim that the RPI was professional, kind and understanding, not that it is at all relevant unless he was abusive or demeaning.

Any appeal against the Penalty Fare would have failed.

It might have helped had he explained the potential consequences of refusal to pay the Penalty Fare, and I think that is a valid point, nevertheless would it have made any difference at the time in terms of how you would react?

I don't believe my liability is now beyond a couple of hundred pounds, but I was hoping to see if anyone out there had similar situations, not whether, by the letter of the law, I had "done wrong".

By the law, yes, most definitely. By the sound of it, you are most definitely guilty of Byelaw 18.2 - unable to present a valid ticket on demand, and possibly 18.1 too.

Incidentally, the PAYG network on Oyster is not clear at all. It would appear entirely arbitrary to a user of the network why Elstree & Borehamwood or Watford Junction have the facility to take Oyster, but not St Albans. Why would they not have a validator if the expense of barriers is too much?

At Farringdon there is a sign saying on the platform "Oyster cards are not accepted beyind E&B", but there's nothing like that at my origin.

There are maps at all stations I believe outlining the validity of Oyster PAYG.

In any case, the onus would be on you to check if unsure. Assuming something is a very dangerous habit on the railways.

Surely it's incumbent upon someone providing a product to give absolute clarity, or at least a modicum of common sense when faced with a genuine mistake.

... and the Penalty Fare is a discretionary measure to dispose of a matter without resorting to court, which would most likely end up costing both parties more.

Sorry there is no better news for you I'm afraid.

 

[455driver]

Why didn't you have your Z1-2 season with you, I don't understand the significance of your daughter being in hospital to you not having it!

 

[lpdanno]

Arctic Troll - thanks for your candid response. Do you know how I can contact Thameslink today to discuss given the proximity of the appearance (Mon or Tue, I cannot honestly remember and don't have the doc to hand)?

I would prefer to settle out of court if poss - lessons learned and all that. Not sure it has ever been given as an option, however.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
My zone 1 & 2 is my usual ticket. It had lapsed as I wasn't going to and from work at that time so I was just dipping into my PAYG reserve on it. I don't think I would have even checked my PAYG balance boarding the train had it been current on my card.

It wouldn't have helped either way, obviously. But I was trying to give the context of solely travelling in Z1&2 on a season ticket, rather than using PAYG or travelling o/side of Oyster boundaries.

 

[Clip]

Arctic Troll - thanks for your candid response. Do you know how I can contact Thameslink today to discuss given the proximity of the appearance (Mon or Tue, I cannot honestly remember and don't have the doc to hand)?

I would prefer to settle out of court if poss - lessons learned and all that. Not sure it has ever been given as an option, however.
.

There should be a contact on the letter you have received or at least one of them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are maps at all stations I believe outlining the validity of Oyster PAYG.

Do Thameslink make announcements? I was on the Southern MK train yesterday and a very clear announcement was made on arrival at Watford - LM normally don't, though.

 

[lpdanno]

I've been using this particular route (within Z1&2) for 11 years and it has never been mentioned on the train or platform.

 

[bb21]

Do Thameslink make announcements? I was on the Southern MK train yesterday and a very clear announcement was made on arrival at Watford - LM normally don't, though.

On the 319s, not on the unrefurbished ones as they don't have PIS screens inside.

Some drivers make announcements at border stations such as Elstree but not all do.

 

[londonboi]

Thameslink trains make announcements or the one I was did when it arrived at East Croydon next station gatwick it came over the pa before stopping and when on platform that oyster was not accepted after East Croydon anyone with a Oyster card leave the train here and purchase the correct ticket from the station ticket office. So I assume it does the same at the north end of the boundary

 

[island]

I get the ticket wasn't valid, but my intention was not to avoid a fare. I asked to pay the fare (either from the last PAYG stop or for the whole journey) and was refused on all occasions.

That is correct. Once you chose not to purchase a ticket for your journey and did not have a valid ticket, the fare payable is a Penalty Fare of £20. Intention is a legal matter and refusing to pay any amount at all – you have the option to pay a minimum payment on the spot of a single fare for your journey with the balance within 21 days – is legally deemed to be intent to avoid the fare altogether.

The guy I spoke to was absolutely horrible

It is very common for us to read accusations of rudeness and misconduct against railway staff. I would invite you to reconsider whether the staff member was genuinely "absolutely horrid" or was actually conducting himself fully reasonably just not telling you what you wanted to hear.

I don't believe my liability is now beyond a couple of hundred pounds, but I was hoping to see if anyone out there had similar situations, not whether, by the letter of the law, I had "done wrong".

You're wrong in that belief. The maximum fine is £1,000, plus £11.50 compensation, a few hundred in costs, and £720 criminal courts charge (assuming the offence is recent and you plead not guilty). If you've been convicted previously under the Regulation of Railways Act, you could also spend up to 3 months inside.

Incidentally, the PAYG network on Oyster is not clear at all. It would appear entirely arbitrary to a user of the network why Elstree & Borehamwood or Watford Junction have the facility to take Oyster, but not St Albans. Why would they not have a validator if the expense of barriers is too much?

It is entirely clear on maps at most if not all stations and carriages. The area has to stop somewhere, as Oyster is a Transport for London product so they're hardly going to run it all the way up to Leicester.

Surely it's incumbent upon someone providing a product to give absolute clarity, or at least a modicum of common sense when faced with a genuine mistake.

As per above there is plenty of clarity, and common sense was applied in charging you the usual fee for someone who had made a mistake, a Penalty Fare of £20 rather than reporting you for a criminal offence as a first move.

 

[lpdanno]

So it would appear maybe I have been naive / stupid with the summons. It says I "entered the train for the purpose of travelling and did not have a ticket entitling travel".

It's 18(1) they're prosecuting me with.

At the bottom 'COSTS APPLICATION' it stated "If you are convicted the Court will be asked to order you to pay costs. If you plead guilty in writing the application will be shown as below. If you disagree with the application you should explain why when you write to the court.

Costs in the sum of £125.00 are applied for".

Now, having never received any sort of legal doc or summons in my life, I assumed (yeah, ass, you, me) that the £125 was my worst case scenario. It would appear that this is not the case.

I would rather save myself a day out of court and a few hundred quid (as much as I am loathe to do so given the circumstance) and pay the money now, but they only have an answerphone and the appearance is supposed to be 0930 on Monday morning.

Erm, any ideas...?

 

[bb21]

So it would appear maybe I have been naive / stupid with the summons.

I think that is a good way to put it, although you are not the first one and will not be the last.

It says I "entered the train for the purpose of travelling and did not have a ticket entitling travel".

It's 18(1) they're prosecuting me with.

The good news is that under the Byelaws, even if you are convicted, there should not be a criminal record, so the question is really on how much financial damage it can do.

At the bottom 'COSTS APPLICATION' it stated "If you are convicted the Court will be asked to order you to pay costs. If you plead guilty in writing the application will be shown as below. If you disagree with the application you should explain why when you write to the court.

Costs in the sum of £125.00 are applied for".

Now, having never received any sort of legal doc or summons in my life, I assumed (yeah, ass, you, me) that the £125 was my worst case scenario. It would appear that this is not the case.

Yes, their costs is only part of the overall figure you will be charged for. There are other things you will have to pay on conviction as island mentioned above.

I would rather save myself a day out of court and a few hundred quid (as much as I am loathe to do so given the circumstance) and pay the money now, but they only have an answerphone and the appearance is supposed to be 0930 on Monday morning.

Erm, any ideas...?

Some of the prosecutions departments are notoriously difficult to get through to. You will need to try and ring them repeatedly and be patient. Is it a geographical number? Hopefully if you have inclusive call minutes it would not be too expensive on that front.

Another possibility if you cannot get through is to ring customer service and try and get a transfer, but there is no guarantee that you will be more successful that way.

 

[lpdanno]

Update : panic over for now, thanks to a level-headed employee at Thameslink Prosecution. Thanks for everyone's input.

I had no intention to travel to Leicester (no offence Leicester). I was travelling on my daily London commuter service called 'Thameslink' (that's named after a river, in London).

Do have yourself a lovely weekend x

 

[lpdanno]

Thanks bb21. I already took the bit between my teeth and resolved. Appreciate your help.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Update : panic over for now, thanks to a level-headed employee at Thameslink Prosecution. Thanks for everyone's input

Hope it was an amicable solution in the circumstances.

If you're using Oyster or Contactless in the future, this is the map with the limits marked as the dotted line: https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf

 

[bb21]

Thanks bb21. I already took the bit between my teeth and resolved. Appreciate your help.

Glad to hear that. Hope your daughter's situation improves.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Do Thameslink make announcements? I was on the Southern MK train yesterday and a very clear announcement was made on arrival at Watford - LM normally don't, though.

Some drivers do and some don't, but the 319s don't have automated announcements.

Each carriage has a route diagram with the Oyster limits shown on it though.

Though if you get on a St Albans fast at St Pancras there often isn't a lot you can do about it once you're on the train.

 

[island]

I think this thread illustrates well a failure of the well-known attitude test –*but glad to see it was rescued.

 

[455driver]

I think this thread illustrates well a failure of the well-known attitude test –*but glad to see it was rescued.

Agreed, but (and I am going to be a bit soft here) the OP did have a lot on his plate at the time with his daughter undergoing heart surgery (isn't it every parents nightmare having a seriously ill child) so we should cut him some slack, although a moments thought could have saved all this grief.

I trust your daughter is well on the way to a full recovery!

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Agreed, but (and I am going to be a bit soft here) the OP did have a lot on his plate at the time with his daughter undergoing heart surgery (isn't it every parents nightmare having a seriously ill child) so we should cut him some slack, although a moments thought could have saved all this grief.

I trust your daughter is well on the way to a full recovery!

I am sure that some automated announcements are made at some TL stations north of the river - e.g. Cricklewood and Hendon to name but a couple.

It's a real shame that the man at St Albans didn't "cut some slack" given the OP's circumstances but I suppose these don't excuse what he did.

Ipdanno: are you in a position to say here what the outcome was?

 

[najaB]

It's a real shame that the man at St Albans didn't "cut some slack" given the OP's circumstances...

A penalty fare is cutting some slack - £20 would have sorted it there and then.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Experience of defending alleged 'Fare Evasion' ? Yes.
But only where there is persuasive Evidence to refute the Prosecution's own Evidence of the crime, and there is nothing that you have posted on here which suggests that you have any such Evidence. Have you?

If you were going to attempt a Defence by yourself, then by now you will be requesting disclosure of the Prosecution's Evidence and will be notifying them of which of their Witnesses you need to cross-examine or advising them of your own Witnesses.

As for reaching an Out of Court settlement (OOC), no, there will be nothing printed on any of the documentation; it is not an element in the Prosecution of crime. But it can be a pragmatic alternative which sometimes a Prosecutor will accept, even on the day of the Trial, and even just before entering the Courtroom at the time listed for the hearing (not that I would advise leaving it any later than neccessary).
In my estimation though, based on the apparent lack of your attempts to date to resolve this matter with the Company, I'll guess that they won't, now, be inclined to accept an OOC by phone. If you attend the Court on the day of the Trial, with your evidence of means (to assist in sentencing), then you will still have a last minute opportunity to speak with the Company's Prosecutor in a meeting room before the Magistrates are called in, and attempt to reach a pragmatic outcome. Good luck if you try!

Unless there is something material which you haven't mentioned, then there really is no point in attempting a Defence, and in the process, incurring further costs which are sure to be awarded against you.

 

[jimbo99]

I do wish "Penalty Fares" were called something else.

"Penalty" suggests something penal, a punishment for doing something wrong. A fine.

People resist because they don't like the implication that they were avoiding paying a fare when they made an honest mistake. I suspect in many cases it's not the amount that's the problem, but the principle of being "fined".

As for the dishonest, I don't think calling it a "penalty" makes any difference - it's just a gamble. So nothing to be lost by a name change.

 

[ComUtoR]

What was the resolution ?

 

[Darandio]

I do wish "Penalty Fares" were called something else.

"Penalty" suggests something penal, a punishment for doing something wrong. A fine.

People resist because they don't like the implication that they were avoiding paying a fare when they made an honest mistake. I suspect in many cases it's not the amount that's the problem, but the principle of being "fined".

As for the dishonest, I don't think calling it a "penalty" makes any difference - it's just a gamble. So nothing to be lost by a name change.

But there is no 'principle' of being fined, they cannot be issued a fine.

Penalty fare is exactly what it is, I don't see the need for change at all.