Do this seem fair to you?

[jumble]

I agree. However, that doesn't mean that a Byelaw 18.1 offence has not occurred - as DaveNewcastle pointed out above this doesn't constitute permission for the OP to travel without a ticket.

I agree that DaveNewcastle's view is correct.

However hypothetically it would be quite interesting in to see if a prosecutor would actually push this and risk him and his company being seen to be behaving in an absurd and very unjust fashion, and for his company to be exposed as being a teller of blatant porkies.
However I am sure the OP does not want to go down that route.

 

[talldave]

In which case should the faq actually say we'll refund you but also take you to court?

 

[najaB]

In which case should the faq actually say we'll refund you but also take you to court?

No. They really shouldn't be threatening any action against a season ticket holder who has forgotten their ticket. While the OP has committed a breach of Byelaw 18.1 there is no logic behind pursuing a prosecution. Nor in reporting them and accruing £250 of 'costs'.

 

[Abpj17]

Yes - it's idiotic. As someone who pays almost 5k a year into GTR coffers, I object to them handling the case like this, and generating (accurately or fictiously) 250 of legal costs.

I take a picture of my railcard the day I buy it. I upload it to their website for the inevitable delay repay claims anyway. You (and others) might want to consider doing the same. It's obviously not the same as having the actual ticket, but might help tip an argument in your favour.

 

[Puffing Devil]

"Up to two" means zero, one or two. No such uncertainty exists in the paragraph I quoted.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Even if convicted, it may well be a conviction with minimal fine and costs awarded.

Alas, those opportunities are now few and far between, with the Criminal Courts Charge introducing a starting point of £150 in penalties, before any proportional fines and costs. Many magistrates have left the bench in protest

 

[talldave]

To be fair they must spend an inordinate amount of money finding employees as incompetent as the ones they have to maintain their image of being utter muppets who couldn't organise a staff outing to a brewery

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely it constitutes other authority to travel, and as such a Byelaw offence has not. A RoRA offence may exist if there was intent, but it seems clear there was not?

 

[furlong]

When asked about this under FOI a few years ago, somewhat surprisingly given the evident overlap with RORA and Penalty Fares legislation and the contents of parliamentary debates, the DfT could find no information to supply regarding its (assumed) assessment that the byelaw was neither repugnant to the general law nor unreasonable. As the DfT's reasoning has seemingly been lost, and in the light of the way it is now being exploited (rightly or wrongly) to extract money from honest passengers who would most likely not be found guilty under RORA nor required to pay a Penalty Fare under the rules of those schemes, perhaps it might reassess and amend this byelaw before someone successfully persuades a court to deal with it?

 

[Kite159]

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.

Although as it's within London, wouldn't it be dealt with by London TravelWatch rather than Transport Focus?

----------

Seems like they are trying to pull a fast-one, hoping people will just pay the £250 in "costs" which goes into Govia's pockets rather than a penalty fare which doesn't go into their pocket?

Complete and utter madness, but that's Govia for you.

 

[furlong]

And on the 'Why wasn't a Penalty Fare issued?' question, the 2002 rules state:

Season-ticket left at home. We expect allowances to be made for season-ticket holders who, for one reason or another, fail to carry their season-ticket or photocard.

The instructions given to authorised collectors must explain what the authorised collector and the season-ticket holder must do in this situation.

If the scheme was in operation and the person dealing with this was an authorised collector (and if they were not, why not?), then it again seems fair to ask the company for a copy of the relevant part of those instructions, and again, to involve the DfT.

 

[Wolfie]

You have nothing to lose by going to London Bridge and seeing what they say.

If I were you, I would not pay a single penny. Condition 35 of the NRCoC is not something they can choose to obey or ignore. It is part of the contract entered into by the train company in selling you a season ticket. Issuing a summons instead of following the NRCoC is a disgraceful act imo.

Too damn right - if they proceed they deserve to be publicly humiliated

It is possible that rather than this being deliberate, it has been mishandled by someone at the TOC, and perhaps speaking to someone more senior may result in them trying to avoid any bad press resulting from failing to follow their own published procedures on forgotten season tickets.

I hope that your post is correct... if not then...

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.

I agree.. and more to the point so will the Evening Standard. I'm sure that someone senior in Southern will review and cease this madness after getting a media kicking....

Oh, and your MP asking questions of SofS for Transport will really enhance the Southern management's life too...

Bash the stupid useless TOC management whenever they pull stunts like this - you know it makes sense! When having to deal with the consequences of their badly trained incompentent staff costs them more than not training properly perhaps they will get off their complacent arrogant coroprate rear-ends and take action!

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.

Indeed... probably a contractual breach and violation of consumer law (unfair conditions etc) too.

In extremis pay them their demand and then take, ensuring massive media attention, the TOC to the County Court. I would love nothing more than to see bailiffs raid GoVia's headoffice with TV cameras present!

 

[Paddy17]

Just a little update on this for those that are interested.

I went along to London Bridge ticket desk today and presented myself with my season ticket along with the MG11 and explained what had happened. They told me there was nothing they could do about it there; they couldn't, for example, rescind it and told me I would need to deal with Govia. The ticket clerk was very surprised that the RPI had dealt with it the way he had and said "he had not done me any favours" by issuing the MG11. It's fair to say that I agree with him on that!

But he was even more surprised and in total disbelief after I told him that I had sent a copy of my season ticket to Govia Thameslink and that they were asking that I pay £250 legal costs or else they would prosecute me. He even called a couple of his colleagues over to tell them about it and have a ""wait til you hear this....." moment. They all had never heard the like of it and told me I should dispute this.

Shortly after this I managed to speak with one of the managers of London Bridge station who happened to be with an ex-RPI. The ex-RPI was also surprised and said that he thought that it was a 'try on' by Govia to try and recover their legal costs. He also seemed to think that I would not be in breach of a byelaw even since I had bought a valid ticket (just that I did not have it on me).

I am going to telephone and try and speak with Govia Thameslink prosecutions dept tomorrow to try and escalate this and get it dealt with. If I can't get it resolved, I'm going to write to them again using the points raised here. I also want them to spell out what specific laws they say I have broken and the basis for their proposed prosecution and why they are seeking to recover legal costs given that I have shown that I am a valid season ticket card holder. Will keep you posted.

 

[najaB]

He also seemed to think that I would not be in breach of a byelaw even since I had bought a valid ticket (just that I did not have it on me).

I agree with everything the staff said except this - Byelaw 18.1 requires you to have the ticket with you.

 

[talldave]

Remember that with Govia the front line muppets that answer the phone don't have the iq to understand even the simple stuff. You'll have to get this escalated to get any sense out of them. For Southern I've only ever got an intelligent response after cc'ing the md or using contacts of forum experts.

 

[pitdiver]

Remember that with Govia the front line muppets that answer the phone don't have the iq to understand even the simple stuff. You'll have to get this escalated to get any sense out of them. For Southern I've only ever got an intelligent response after cc'ing the md or using contacts of forum experts.

Further to the above. A couple of weeks ago I rang them to enquire where if possible I could obtain a Oyster Card . After about 25 mins I gave up and put the phone down. I don't think the guy at the other end even knew what an Oyster Card was.

 

[MikeWh]

Further to the above. A couple of weeks ago I rang them to enquire where if possible I could obtain a Oyster Card . After about 25 mins I gave up and put the phone down. I don't think the guy at the other end even knew what an Oyster Card was.

And this page on their website suggests that you can't use Oyster on Southern trains between Harrow and Wealdstone and Watford Junction!

One wonders if they'll update it next year when the Gatwick and Epsom extensions go online?

 

[Paddy17]

Ok, I have spent most of the morning trying to get in contact with the Govia Thameslink Railway prosecutions department to discuss this matter with them direct.

There is no telephone number on the letter which they sent to me nor any telephone number anywhere on the website to get in contact with that department. I spent 30 minutes with the Govia Thameslink customer services department and they refused to give me the telephone number for the prosecutions department and they told me that they did not have it. So there is no way of speaking with their prosecutions department direct it seems?

They obviously want to make this as hard as possible for customers to try and resolve these issues in the hope they will give up. But I will not.

 

[Wolfie]

Ok, I have spent most of the morning trying to get in contact with the Govia Thameslink Railway prosecutions department to discuss this matter with them direct.

There is no telephone number on the letter which they sent to me nor any telephone number anywhere on the website to get in contact with that department. I spent 30 minutes with the Govia Thameslink customer services department and they refused to give me the telephone number for the prosecutions department and they told me that they did not have it. So there is no way of speaking with their prosecutions department direct it seems?

They obviously want to make this as hard as possible for customers to try and resolve these issues in the hope they will give up. But I will not.

Write to the MD, copy it to your MP, give them 10 days to reply substantively or you will go to the media.

 

[furlong]

Write to the MD, copy it to your MP, give them 10 days to reply substantively or you will go to the media.

And try to seek the assistance of the Department for Transport, either informally or formally. It could be your best ally in this.

 

[najaB]

Write to the MD, copy it to your MP, give them 10 days to reply substantively or you will go to the media.

You might not need to go nuclear just yet - I'd call their customer services team again and ask to speak with someone senior (e.g. a supervisor/manager) - don't be rude, but also don't take no for an answer.

Once you have someone senior on the line ask again for the prosecutions team's contact number. Expect the answer to be the same (I suspect they don't take inbound calls just because of the number of cases they have on the go and the fact that any callers would tend not to be the most polite to them), when they don't give it to you ask for them to get the prosecutions team to call you. Get them to commit to a callback within a specified timeframe - e.g. before 3pm.

(As an aside, if I were in your position I would want all communications with the prosecutions team to be by letter/email so that there's a paper trail.)

If this is unsuccessful, write a full and complete letter/email to the CEO (Charles Horton) explaining exactly what happened and how you have been treated so far. Explain that your intention has always been to pay the fare from Penge West to London Bridge and that at no point have you been given the opportunity to do so.

Ask for a response to your letter/email within five working days, and resolution within 14 days. Explain that your next step will be to escalate the matter to transport focus and/or the DfT.

 

[Wolfie]

You might not need to go nuclear just yet - I'd call their customer services team again and ask to speak with someone senior (e.g. a supervisor/manager) - don't be rude, but also don't take no for an answer.

Once you have someone senior on the line ask again for the prosecutions team's contact number. Expect the answer to be the same (I suspect they don't take inbound calls just because of the number of cases they have on the go and the fact that any callers would tend not to be the most polite to them), when they don't give it to you ask for them to get the prosecutions team to call you. Get them to commit to a callback within a specified timeframe - e.g. before 3pm.

(As an aside, if I were in your position I would want all communications with the prosecutions team to be by letter/email so that there's a paper trail.)

If this is unsuccessful, write a full and complete letter/email to the CEO (Charles Horton) explaining exactly what happened and how you have been treated so far. Explain that your intention has always been to pay the fare from Penge West to London Bridge and that at no point have you been given the opportunity to do so.

Ask for a response to your letter/email within five working days, and resolution within 14 days. Explain that your next step will be to escalate the matter to transport focus and/or the DfT.

I understand what you say and you offer valuable advice.

However, perhaps if more people did go nuclear sooner, and Mr Horton had to spend more of his time dealing with the aftermath, he might get off his doubtless well paid posterior and actually sort out the shambles which he is ultimately responsible for!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Have you tried Twitter? They tend to jump quicker when the story is public.

You won't get their phone number, but customer relations should be able to get them to call you.

I'm not sure what benefit copying in the CEO (*'s PA) will bring at this stage

 

[Harpers Tate]

In my experience (not, I'll stress with a TOC) writing politely and calmly to the MD by name is often highly effective at producing proper results.

 

[gray1404]

I do feel that at this point in your complaint you are entitled to enlist the help of Transport Focus. I do think you should contact them at this point. This is because have already written back to the TOC when they first wrote to you and in your reply you explained the circumstances and enclosed a copy of your season ticket. It appears that they have totally ignored this and still get you a massive bill, along with the threat of legal action if you don't pay. Contact Transport Focus now I say and ask them to make representations for you.

 

[Tetchytyke]

As its London it is London Travelwatch, who are a bit more helpful.

 

[najaB]

I do feel that at this point in your complaint you are entitled to enlist the help of Transport Focus.

I don't believe it would be appropriate to go to London Travelwatch at this point. To quote from their online form:

London TravelWatch will not be able to help until you have made a complaint to the operator and they have had the opportunity to address your concerns in writing.

Unless I've missed it, the only written response that the OP has had from GTR was the letter from the prosecutions department. I do not recall them posting that they have had a written response from the customer services side of the shop.

 

[island]

Ok, I have spent most of the morning trying to get in contact with the Govia Thameslink Railway prosecutions department to discuss this matter with them direct.

There is no telephone number on the letter which they sent to me nor any telephone number anywhere on the website to get in contact with that department. I spent 30 minutes with the Govia Thameslink customer services department and they refused to give me the telephone number for the prosecutions department and they told me that they did not have it. So there is no way of speaking with their prosecutions department direct it seems?

They obviously want to make this as hard as possible for customers to try and resolve these issues in the hope they will give up. But I will not.

Or in the alternative they want all communications to be in writing so that they can be used in evidence/it avoids he said she said type arguments/it protects them from having to talk to potentially abusive customers.

 

[gray1404]

I don't believe it would be appropriate to go to London Travelwatch at this point. To quote from their online form:Unless I've missed it, the only written response that the OP has had from GTR was the letter from the prosecutions department. I do not recall them posting that they have had a written response from the customer services side of the shop.

So what you are saying is it might be better the OP writes to Customer Relations to give the TOC a second chance to accept and apply the fact they had a season ticket left at home. Then, if after doing that, if GTR still don't play ball then he/she can go to London Travelwatch.

 

[najaB]

So what you are saying is it might be better the OP writes to Customer Relations to give the TOC a second chance to accept and apply the fact they had a season ticket left at home. Then, if after doing that, if GTR still don't play ball then he/she can go to London Travelwatch.

Other than changing 'transport focus' to London Travelwatch, I still suggest the course of action I outlined in post #80.

 

[Paddy17]

Thanks for all of your replies and help so far.

An update: I contacted Transport Focus and explained the situation. They referred me on to London Travelwatch. I spoke to a nice lady there and she was not impressed with the way I was being treated by Govia said it was something that they would definitely be willing to help me with, so I have now sent them a copy of all of the documents and information and it is with them now. Will keep you posted. Am hoping they will be able to talk some sense into Govia to be reasonable and abide by both the National Rail Conditions of Carriage and also their own company policy as per their website:

http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/contact-us/frequently-asked-questions/penalty-fares-faqs/#d