Do this seem fair to you?

[Paddy17]

In a nutshell: I am the holder of a yearly season ticket which entitles me to travel between my home station in Zone 5 to London Bridge. I use overland trains only for my commute and I paid around £1,300 for that ticket. It expires in March 2016. It is one of the old paper tickets which I need to physically insert into the ticket barrier machines.

The other week I left home without that paper ticket as it was left in the breast pocket of my other suit. I lifted the wrong suit jacket by mistake in my haste to rush out to work (the suits are practically identical). It was a completely innocent mistake. There are no ticket barriers or inspectors at my home station so I boarded the train and I did not realise that I was ticketless until I went to get off at London Bridge.

Upon discovering I was ticketless I made no attempt to exit and I voluntarily presented myself at the Excess Fares window and explained my situation as per the above. The man behind the Excess Fares window accepted my story and told me I would have to pay a return fare and I would be on my way. I agreed and accepted to do this.

As this transaction was proceeding a Revenue Protection officer came over out of the blue and saw what was happening and put a stop to it. He stepped in for no reason and without any explanation he issued me with an MG11. He refused to let me pay the return fare as had been previously agreed between myself and the man behind the Excess Fares desk. He did not offer to let me pay a penalty fare and went straight to the MG11. I repeatedly offered to pay the return fare and even a penalty fare and explained my innocent mistake, but he would not listen and he refused to deal with it in any other way.

I then duly receive a letter from Govia Thameslink prosecutions department. I responded to it in a detailed letter explaining the innocent mistake above, confirming that there was no attempt to evade paying a fare and providing them with clear colour copies of both my yearly season ticket and photocard ID so that they can see that I am indeed the holder of a yearly season ticket for that journey and which had been paid for a year in advance.

I have today received a further letter from Govia Thameslink prosecutions department telling me that "there is nothing in your response which negates your legal liability in this matter" but considering my points in mitigation and considering that this is my first offence they will not proceed with the Court summons if I pay £4.20 for the single fare and also £250 towards their legal costs i.e. £254.20 in total within 21 days!!!

The whole situation seems totally unreasonable to me and just a deliberate attempt to raise revenue and extract money from me. It was a completely innocent mistake to forget my yearly season ticket that day and I honestly presented myself to the rail staff, but yet I am being punished. Technically I HAD paid for the rail journey but just I had forgotten the yearly season ticket that day. I voluntarily presented myself to Excess fares and agreed to pay the return fare and even a penalty fare, but these options were either overruled or not used.

The whole thing seems very unfair and heavy handed and almost an abuse of power. Do I have any option here other than just to pay them? As a point of principle it would really annoy me to do this and the whole thing seems totally unjust.

 

[bb21]

I am on the move so cannot go into too much detail atm. Someone else will be able to go into more details.

Normally annual season ticket holders are given two opportunities per year to present their ticket afterwards in exactly this sort of situation you described, so I am inclined to agree that it is unnecessarily heavy-handed.

 

[Clip]

Definitley write to them as they claim that you should

What happens if I forget my season ticket or photocard?
If you lose or forget your season ticket/photocard you must buy a replacement ticket for your journey. Keep the tickets because you can claim a full refund at the ticket office where you purchased your season ticket. Only two refund applications will be considered in a 12 month period and you may be charged an administration fee

If you find that you don’t have your season ticket once you're on the train you’ll be asked to give your details and to pay the standard single fare for your journey (which will be refunded on production of your valid season ticket) If you have no money then you will be given a 'nil paid' penalty fare.

You must then send a copy of your valid season ticket to the address shown on the penalty fare. If you don't do this within 21 days you will be asked to pay the full amount (which will be twice the standard day single or £20, whichever is the greater) for the journey undertaken.

A show a copy of your season to them too.

 

[maniacmartin]

I'm guessing that this was a roaming RPI who happened to be at London Bridge that day, as the usual London Bridge staff are a friendly bunch.

The source of Clip's quote can be found here for the Southern brand and here for the Thameslink brand. I'd definitely write back referencing the appropriate document and see what they say.

This is also referenced (but not guaranteed) in section 35c of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage

 

[Paddy17]

Just to confirm, enclosed with my initial letter of response to Govia Thameslink were clear colour copies of photos of both my yearly season ticket and my photocard ID, so they know I am definitely the holder of a valid yearly season ticket for that journey. In addition this is the first occasion in about 15 or so years of commuting that I had forgotten my season ticket, so I am not a repeat offender and this is the first time I have had to deal with anything like this.

 

[furlong]

Well, once you have paid the £4.20, you can claim it back from them as their letter should have pointed out to you:

Season Tickets left at home

If you do not have your Season Ticket with you when you travel you must buy a ticket for your journey. You will be able to get a refund on the fare paid on the first two occasions this happens in any 12 month period.

I don't know, but a solicitor might also be able to find a way to use the agreement you made with the company at the Excess Fares booth to derail a prosecution.

As for how they have reasonably already spent £250 investigating a case that, on the face of it, needs no investigation, the mind boggles.

 

[clagmonster]

Byelaw 18 states:
"18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas
(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter
any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a
valid ticket entitling him to travel.
(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity
when asked to do so by an authorised person.
(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or
validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where,
he began his journey; or
(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey
permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a
valid ticket."
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf

Would clause 3(iii) apply here, given that an authorised person presumably wrote the aforementioned quoted section of the website? Does this in effect count as a form of global permission for occasionally forgetful season ticket holders?

I'd be surprised if there was any case under the Regulation of Railways Act for a prosecution here.

 

[najaB]

I would reply to them with a cheque enclosed for the £4.20 fare due. While technically you are in breach of the Byelaws I agree that there is no way they have incurred £250 in costs. I would ask for a senior manager to review this case.

 

[furlong]

You could also try to get the Department for Transport involved, asking whether there are grounds to open an investigation into the way it is operating its franchise. It might feel a duty to seek some reassurances from a franchise holder that is attempting to obtain £250 "costs" from a season ticket holder who has left their season ticket at home and offered to pay the fare for the journey in line with the standard procedures where no administration fee is applicable.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket."

I presume that is what happened to me when there was a replacement taxi from Shirebrook to Nottingham recently. I'd not paid the fare before getting in the cab, and I did go straight to Customer Services to pay it but was told it was okay.

About the OP's story, does an RPI have the ability to override the Excess Fares member of staff? Incidentally, did they present ID to you?

 

[Paddy17]

About the OP's story, does an RPI have the ability to override the Excess Fares member of staff? Incidentally, did they present ID to you?

The RPI quickly flashed a badge at me, that was it. He did not inform me that he was an RPI or explain why he was getting involved. He demanded that I leave the Excess Fares queue and be dealt with by him. I told him I did not want to do this and was happy to pay the return fare as had been agreed, but he insisted and would not take no for an answer. He did not give me any caution.

When I went to speak with him I asked him why he had intervened when it was already being resolved and dealt with without any problem? The RPI presented it as effectively doing me a favour. He said that he would be issuing me with a piece of paper which I could use to exit the ticket barrier today without paying anything. Then all I would have to do would be to present that piece of paper along with my yearly season ticket at any ticket office within 14 days and the whole thing would be forgotten about. Of course this was a complete load of nonsense since the 'piece of paper' turned out to be an MG11, which is the first stage to a criminal prosecution for fare evasion and which had led to all this and which it seems clear they won't agree simply to forget about upon presentation of your yearly season ticket.

Therefore on top of all this I believe that I may have been misinformed or misled by the RPI. I do not know if this was deliberate or not but in any event I have already lodged a complaint with Govia Thameslink about the way in which it was handled by the RPI in question. Incidentally, when I told my story to the Customer Service team at Govia Thameslink they seemed quite surprised and shocked that the RPI has intervened and escalated the matter in the way that he did.

 

[Phil.]

I've got this correct haven't I?
Man arrives at his destination without a ticket - for whatever reason. Voluntarily goes to the excess ticket window and buys a return ticket to cover the entire journey that he's made and the one that he'll be making later. Revenue Protection Inspector then steps in and, despite the agreement that's been reached between the man and the rail company's representative decides that he's committed an offence and wants to see him punished.
The world's gone mad.
Please, don't start quoting bye law this and bye law that. The man was not trying to pull any sort of fiddle, he was trying to pay for his past and potential journey.

 

[30907]

Please, don't start quoting bye law this and bye law that.

Please do, as everything quoted supports the OP!

And the fault lies with Govia's Prosecutions Department for ignoring them.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Would clause 3(iii) apply here, given that an authorised person presumably wrote the aforementioned quoted section of the website? Does this in effect count as a form of global permission for occasionally forgetful season ticket holders?
.

No. It would not.

 

[londonbridge]

Send them a cheque for the £4.20 along with a letter stating that, under the relevant byelaws, you now consider the matter to be closed. If they persist with the threat of court action get Passenger Focus involved.

Edit: I note it's now called Transport Focus.

 

[najaB]

In a nutshell: I am the holder of a yearly season ticket which entitles me to travel between my home station in Zone 5 to London Bridge.

What station did you start from, and at what time?

 

[Paddy17]

What station did you start from, and at what time?

My home station where I boarded is Penge West. I got on an 08:47 London overground train, travelled as far as New Cross gate and then changed there and got a Southern overland train one stop in to London Bridge.

Have checked and Penge West is actually Zone 4, so my mistake in saying it was Zone 5. Season ticket says it's valid between "London Terminals & Penge Stations".

 

[clagmonster]

I've got this correct haven't I?
Man arrives at his destination without a ticket - for whatever reason. Voluntarily goes to the excess ticket window and buys a return ticket to cover the entire journey that he's made and the one that he'll be making later. Revenue Protection Inspector then steps in and, despite the agreement that's been reached between the man and the rail company's representative decides that he's committed an offence and wants to see him punished.
The world's gone mad.
Please, don't start quoting bye law this and bye law that. The man was not trying to pull any sort of fiddle, he was trying to pay for his past and potential journey. If these R.P.I.s are so keen to catch real fare fiddlers they should spend a bit of time on the permanently open and unmanned downside gate at Redhill.

I'd perhaps argue with the voluntarily bit as it would be unlikely that the barriers weren't in operation, thus the passenger would have little option but to seek to pay a fare. However, I am in full agreement with the principle of your post.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No. It would not.

In that case, sadly, I don't see any defence to a byelaw prosecution. Would you agree that there is no offence committed under Regulation of Railways Act?

 

[najaB]

My home station where I boarded is Penge West. I got on an 08:47 London overground train...

Hmm... it is a staffed station and the ticket office opens at 7:00am (and it also has a ticket machine) so you could technically be found guilty of a Byelaw 18 offence since you didn't take the first opportunity to correct your ticketless state (ignoring for now the fact you didn't realise you didn't have the ticket until arriving at London Bridge).

 

[Paddy17]

Hmm... it is a staffed station and the ticket office opens at 7:00am (and it also has a ticket machine) so you could technically be found guilty of a Byelaw 18 offence since you didn't take the first opportunity to correct your ticketless state (ignoring for now the fact you didn't realise you didn't have the ticket until arriving at London Bridge).

Yes, the station is manned but there are no paper ticket barriers and so I did not realise I did not have a ticket and so unsurprisingly I did not purchase a ticket at Penge West.

I may technically have been caught by some bye law, but it is the way in which it has been dealt with; the failure to follow their own guidelines of how they say they propose to deal with commuters with season tickets but who forget their ticket; the heavy handed way in which the discretion was exercised by the RPI; and that the prosecutions department are now trying to fleece me for £250 on top that I am taking issue with.

I am happy to pay the £4.20, but they are now basically putting a gun to my head and saying pay £250 costs on top or else we will criminally prosecute you. I have been given no explanation of how the £250 is made up or has been incurred and it seems totally disproportionate. I was happy to pay the return fare at the time but this was refused by the RPI. Now I gone through this administrative process and their solution is the same - pay the fare, but now they have added £250 on top. It's madness and bureaucracy gone mad.

 

[tucker]

For what it's worth here's my point of view.
Ever since the penalty fares came into operation I have always held this opinion.
If you attempt to travel and don't have a ticket( for whatever reason, running late, ticket office closed, machine broken etc) then as long as you present yourself voluntarily to the guard, ticket inspector or whoever then you should be charged your normal fare. You have made an attempt to pay. If you don't and you get caught then as far as I'm concerned you tried to dodge paying, got caught, pay up.
In your case both people, the excess fares window and the revenue officer are employed by the same company.
Explain that you offered to pay, you didn't try to sneak off without paying. You wanted to pay. That one employee says it's ok but another differs shows the company doesn't have a proper procedure or process in place.
Therefore, I would base my case on that. Pay the money you owe for your journey. Then ask for a copy of the company procedure. Then explain that 2 employees working to that procedure differed. If the employees can't understand it what chance do the customers have.
I hope this helps.

 

[furlong]

The company's procedure on its website (quoted by others above) seems unambiguous to me. Why was it not followed?

Further, the company seems to have made a franchise commitment to use a Penalty Fares Scheme. I haven't checked if this journey was covered, but if it was, that's another DfT level question as to why the scheme could be bypassed in this case and instead a request made for a seemingly unjustifiably large amount of money. What is the use of mandating that a Penalty Fares Scheme must be used if the company then freely disregards it and issues demands for "costs" many times larger than the scheme permits in cases where the scheme itself would not impose a penalty?

 

[najaB]

I may technically have been caught by some bye law, but it is the way in which it has been dealt with; the failure to follow their own guidelines of how they say they propose to deal with commuters with season tickets but who forget their ticket; the heavy handed way in which the discretion was exercised by the RPI; and that the prosecutions department are now trying to fleece me for £250 on top that I am taking issue with.

Sorry, you may have gotten the impression that I was saying that the TOC is acting correctly - I was not. I was simply trying to see if they had any legal basis for prosecution or not. If you had boarded at an unstaffed station then I would have said to pay the £4.20 and tell them to stick the request for £250 where the sun doesn't shine.

Unfortunately, since you boarded at a staffed station you would have a case to answer if they were to take it to court. I do not believe you should have to pay any more than the single fare from Penge West to London Bridge.

 

[furlong]

I do not believe you should have to pay any more than the single fare from Penge West to London Bridge.

And that must then be refunded by them without any administration charge.

 

[najaB]

And that must then be refunded by them without any administration charge.

I would say 'should' be refunded as the 'forget your season ticket, buy a ticket and get a refund' scheme isn't enshrined as a right in the NRCoC. I know it's semantics but their webpage says "you will be able to get" which isn't quite the same thing as "you will get".

 

[furlong]

I would say 'should' be refunded as the 'forget your season ticket, buy a ticket and get a refund' scheme isn't enshrined as a right in the NRCoC. I know it's semantics but their webpage says "you will be able to get" which isn't quite the same thing as "you will get".

Please re-read it.

If you find that you don’t have your season ticket once you're on the train you’ll be asked to give your details and to pay the standard single fare for your journey (which will be refunded on production of your valid season ticket)

Unambiguous, and arguably contractual too.

We don't have complete information, so there might still be more to this than we know, but otherwise it looks to me like one of those rare cases which might 'offend the public conscience' were it to proceed.

 

[najaB]

Unambiguous, and arguably contractual too.

The Thameslink version is unambiguous, the Southern version less so. Regardless, I believe that they should get a free refund. I was merely pointing out that it isn't actually a protected right under the NRCoC.

 

[Bevan Price]

On a point of interest - do RPIs receive some kind of commission / pay bonus when ticket disputes are (potentially) taken to court. etc ?

 

[Paddy17]

Guys, many thanks for the replies so far. Very helpful and much appreciated! I have a few questions having pondered this overnight:

So, if I sent them £4.25 and tell them to whistle for their £250 in costs and referring to their own guidelines and potential complaint to the Department of Transport etc. what do you think the reaction will be? Are they entitled to run the prosecution and rack up yet more costs just purely for recovery of their original costs?

Would a Judge perhaps disallow them their legal costs if he/she accepts that I was willing to pay the return fare initially but this was refused by Govia, but now Govia are telling me to do exactly the same and it is clear that they are only interested in pursuing this for recovery of revenue with nothing actually achieved?

Also as regards costs, the £250 figure appears to have been plucked out of the air and seems very high, particularly given the early stage we are at - are they not obliged to provide me with a breakdown and explain how these costs have reasonably been incurred?

Finally, although they have told me of their intention to prosecute and that they consider me liable, they have kept it vague and never actually confirmed under what law or what basis they are proposing to prosecute. If I request them to spell this out for me are they obliged to?

By the way, I would lose my job if I got a criminal record, so the stakes for me are high. I would want to know now if they are prosecuting me only under the Byelaw 18 offence and not the s.5 Railways Act offence. I can't for the life of me see that they could have any real prospect of arguing intent to evade on my part. However having read round a bit the Byelaw 18 is strict liability offence it seems and given that I could not produce a valid ticket it is an 'open goal' for them.

 

[reb0118]

Just a quick question - did you buy a ticket for your return journey home, and if so do you still posses it? The reason I ask is that you will be entitled to a refund of this upon presentation of your season ticket to a booking office, usual caveats apply.

Once you have done that you could enquire of the company why they are proceeding in such a vastly different way to regulate your outward journey.

Season ticket holders are entitled to this additional safeguard but if the RPI felt that this warranted further investigation he should have obtained details, issued a penalty fare [PF], but then, crucially, informed the OP that if everything was in order then the PF would be quashed on appeal and that any monies paid would be refunded.

By the way, I would lose my job if I got a criminal record, so the stakes for me are high...... having read round a bit the Byelaw 18 is strict liability offence it seems and given that I could not produce a valid ticket it is an 'open goal' for them.

I can see how you would be worried. However, depending on your relationship with your bosses a heads up to appraise them of your predicament can sometimes work wonders. That is your decision though......

Good luck in your endeavours.