Summons by Northern Rail..Advice Needed Please

[lesleypallmall]

This was never a debt in my opinion Neil

 

[Moonshot]

Lesley.....how often do you travel by train?

 

[Bletchleyite]

This was never a debt in my opinion

It is, because it is a matter of fact that you did not have a valid ticket for your journey, so you owe, and did from the point you started your journey, the difference (excess) between what you did have and what you should have had.

If the guard had come through he would have charged you it on board, but often there isn't time.

 

[najaB]

This was never a debt in my opinion Neil

The Court will decide based on matters of law, not matters of your opinion.

 

[DaleCooper]

This was never a debt in my opinion Neil

You came to this forum for advice and have received just that from some very reasonable, knowledgeable and unbiased people, please take their advice.

 

[lesleypallmall]

Both letters came from the same "Debt recovery and prosecution unit " of Northern Rail.
The first asked for the £2.40 and the second for £2.40 plus £80 "Fixed Penalty Notice".
I had gone to the ticket counter at Piccadilly and asked for a day return to Bolton, I paid the money asked and was given the tickets, no other conversation took place.
The STM special revenue man took both parts of my ticket from me. These are "offered up as exhibit 1A1 " according to his witness statement which also states that I told him that I don't usually travel by train and didn't know the Peak/Off Peak times.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The STM special revenue man took both parts of my ticket from me. These are "offered up as exhibit 1A1 " according to his witness statement which also states that I told him that I don't usually travel by train and didn't know the Peak/Off Peak times.

Which is most probably why you were simply offered the option to pay the fare outstanding before the matter escalated (though I do think it's silly you weren't charged it on the spot, perhaps they didn't have the means to do that on them). If he had felt at the time you were deliberately evading the fare, the first letter would have had the £80 on it.

It's the fact that you have deliberately avoided dealing with this issue that has led them to believe there was deliberate evasion. I suspect it will be impossible to convince a Court that there wasn't, and as such proceeding to Court will be costly and inconvenient for you, and may jeopardise your career if you do a job reliant on a clean criminal record.

I really would strongly suggest you pay the sum requested and learn for next time. If you do so, the matter will go away.

 

[bb21]

I see, so in essence you were indeed given an opportunity to pay the difference in fare. Whether you were somewhere else when the letter arrived is immaterial. The fact that you simply ignored the matter when you became aware of it made it look very bad indeed.

In that case I retract my earlier suggestion and think that you are playing a very dangerous game, especially if the difference in fare still remains unpaid to date. Don't let pride get in the way of rational thinking.

There is not a lot else I can say.

 

[Llanigraham]

This was never a debt in my opinion Neil

Then I am sorry to say that your opinion is VERY wrong.

Your ticket was not applicable to the train you caught.
You ignored a request to pay the £2:40.
You ignored a further request for payment. £80 plus £2.40.
You apparently have ignored all correspondence from the company.
This has resulted in your call to Court,
If you are found guilty, which on all the evidence here is more than likely, this will result in a much heavier fine and a criminal record.

I suggest you listen to what the experts on here are telling you and pay the £102.40 promptly.

 

[lesleypallmall]

Please read my opening statement again.. I do say "I then got a letter from the "Prosecutions Unit " asking for payment of the difference between peak and off peak fare"
I am a mature lady by the way and it's a bit too late for my career opportunities to be adversely affected.
Thank you all for your interest and advice.

 

[MichaelAMW]

Please read my opening statement again.. I do say "I then got a letter from the "Prosecutions Unit " asking for payment of the difference between peak and off peak fare"
I am a mature lady by the way and it's a bit too late for my career opportunities to be adversely affected.
Thank you all for your interest and advice.

Yes, we understand that, we really do. When Llanigraham said "You ignored a request to pay the £2:40" he meant that you did nothing to respond to that letter, regardless of the fact you received it somewhat later than it was sent.

 

[bb21]

Yes, we understand that, we really do. When Llanigraham said "You ignored a request to pay the £2:40" he meant that you did nothing to respond to that letter, regardless of the fact you received it somewhat later than it was sent.

I think she was responding to one of my questions but I have removed it as it is not really material to the decision on how to proceed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, we understand that, we really do. When Llanigraham said "You ignored a request to pay the £2:40" he meant that you did nothing to respond to that letter, regardless of the fact you received it somewhat later than it was sent.

Indeed.

If I got home from holiday (or whatever) and found the two letters you mention, I would be immediately (or as soon as offices opened) on the phone to the company looking to explain what had happened and pay the £2.whatever requested by the original letter.

 

[bb21]

lesleypallmall, I guess your mind is already made up and none of us can really sway your opinion. Unfortunately I believe it is the opinion of most people on this forum that it is not a wise decision to challenge this in court given the exact situation you find yourself in, but that is ultimately your decision.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I don't think it's reasonable to pay £102.40, is it worth writing to them with a payment of £2.40 and explanation? Should I go to Court

I think I have answered this twice already, but if it helps I'll try to be more specific. Settle now to close the matter and get on with the things that matter in your life.

If you let it go to Court, it will cost you in time and stress, and with miniscule benefit to you if you succeed in defending the claim; with a much greater cost to you than £102.40 if you fail.
I really can't see why you would want to choose the risker option - for the reasons given here and further up the thread.

 

[John Palmer]

Most unfortunate that details of the ticket concerned cannot be made available. The OP has now told us twice that she asked simply for a day return ticket to Bolton. The prosecution's evidence records her statement that she does not usually travel by train and did not know the Peak/Off-Peak times. In those circumstances I would be surprised to learn that she had asked specifically for an off-peak ticket. No doubt she can confirm for us whether she did so.

If the TOC is to be believed then an off-peak ticket is what she was sold. According to the OP’s account of her conversation with the seller this is not the ticket for which she asked. A request for a day return is, without more, a request for an Anytime ticket. Before selling a ticket subject to an off-peak restriction I would have expected the seller to explain such a ticket's advantages and disadvantages, but according to the OP no such explanation was offered. That would be consistent with the sale of an Anytime ticket, although the seller would still have failed to discharge the duty imposed by NRCOC 12 to advise her of the restrictions applicable to a day return ticket.

On the assumption that the OP did make a peak time journey when in possession only of an off-peak ticket, it is clear that she must pay the difference between the Anytime and Off-peak fare. Even if, as I suspect, she believed she held a valid ticket for her journey, she is imperilling herself if she declines to acknowledge that obligation.

NRCOC 12 says:

"If you have an Off-Peak or Super Off-Peak ticket and board a train on which your ticket is not valid, you will only be charged the difference between the fare you have paid and the cheapest valid Anytime or Off-Peak fare for the service concerned. … This rule does not apply in designated Penalty Fares areas, where you may be required to pay a Penalty Fare."

I understand that the prosecutor is Northern Rail, and that it does not operate a penalty fare scheme. I note that the original demand for the excess has been escalated to include a demand for a 'Fixed Penalty', of £100.00, as I read it. Am I correct in construing Condition 12 to mean that in the OP's circumstances such a penalty could only be demanded if the irregularity occurred in an appproriately designated Penalty Fares area and that this was not here the case? How might that affect an attempt to infer an intention to evade payment of the fare from failure to respond to a series of demands that included a demand that could not lawfully be made?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

lesleypallmall, my advice to you is unchanged, but I fear the following post might lead you to hesitate in taking my advice. If it does, then sadly, it is misleading you.

. . . .I understand that the prosecutor is Northern Rail, and that it does not operate a penalty fare scheme. I note that the original demand for the excess has been escalated to include a demand for a 'Fixed Penalty', of £100.00, as I read it. Am I correct in construing Condition 12 to mean that in the OP's circumstances such a penalty could only be demanded if the irregularity occurred in an appproriately designated Penalty Fares area and that this was not here the case? How might that affect an attempt to infer an intention to evade payment of the fare from failure to respond to a series of demands that included a demand that could not lawfully be made?

The offer that has been made to you to settle the matter now, by way of an Out of Court settlement, is NOT a "penalty" is NOT a "demand" and is NOT under the Penalty Fares Regulations.
It is exactly what I have refered to it as : it is an offer to settle the matter without taking it forward for a Court to decide the outcome. You are under no obligation of liability to pay that offer, though I have to repeat, that I am recommending you to do so, for the reasons give above.

 

[221129]

Most unfortunate that details of the ticket concerned cannot be made available. The OP has now told us twice that she asked simply for a day return ticket to Bolton. The prosecution's evidence records her statement that she does not usually travel by train and did not know the Peak/Off-Peak times. In those circumstances I would be surprised to learn that she had asked specifically for an off-peak ticket. No doubt she can confirm for us whether she did so.

If the TOC is to be believed then an off-peak ticket is what she was sold. According to the OP’s account of her conversation with the seller this is not the ticket for which she asked. A request for a day return is, without more, a request for an Anytime ticket. Before selling a ticket subject to an off-peak restriction I would have expected the seller to explain such a ticket's advantages and disadvantages, but according to the OP no such explanation was offered. That would be consistent with the sale of an Anytime ticket, although the seller would still have failed to discharge the duty imposed by NRCOC 12 to advise her of the restrictions applicable to a day return ticket.

On the assumption that the OP did make a peak time journey when in possession only of an off-peak ticket, it is clear that she must pay the difference between the Anytime and Off-peak fare. Even if, as I suspect, she believed she held a valid ticket for her journey, she is imperilling herself if she declines to acknowledge that obligation.

NRCOC 12 says:

"If you have an Off-Peak or Super Off-Peak ticket and board a train on which your ticket is not valid, you will only be charged the difference between the fare you have paid and the cheapest valid Anytime or Off-Peak fare for the service concerned. … This rule does not apply in designated Penalty Fares areas, where you may be required to pay a Penalty Fare."

I understand that the prosecutor is Northern Rail, and that it does not operate a penalty fare scheme. I note that the original demand for the excess has been escalated to include a demand for a 'Fixed Penalty', of £100.00, as I read it. Am I correct in construing Condition 12 to mean that in the OP's circumstances such a penalty could only be demanded if the irregularity occurred in an appproriately designated Penalty Fares area and that this was not here the case? How might that affect an attempt to infer an intention to evade payment of the fare from failure to respond to a series of demands that included a demand that could not lawfully be made?

She was requested to pay the fare due and failed to do so. That is where the intent lies.

 

[najaB]

A request for a day return is, without more, a request for an Anytime ticket.

Please, no.

On the assumption that the OP did make a peak time journey when in possession only of an off-peak ticket, it is clear that she must pay the difference between the Anytime and Off-peak fare.

This is the only thing that needs to be considered. The OP was offered the chance to pay this difference and declined, hence a RoRA prosecution will be successful.

 

[John Palmer]

The OP says, in terms, that she received a "Fixed Penalty Notice". On what basis can any contributor who has not seen the document contradict this? All any of us can do us respond to what we are told has taken place.

Please, no.

I am sorry, but I do not understand. If I ask for a day return without further qualification, why would I be sold anything other than an Anytime day return?

 

[najaB]

I am sorry, but I do not understand. If I ask for a day return without further qualification, why would I be sold anything other than an Anytime day return?

Because the rail industry has been accused repeatedly in the press of 'ripping off' consumers by selling Anytime tickets when Off-Peak tickets would have been valid.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am sorry, but I do not understand. If I ask for a day return without further qualification, why would I be sold anything other than an Anytime day return?

Because that would lead to complaints of overcharging.

 

[221129]

The OP says, in terms, that she received a "Fixed Penalty Notice". On what basis can any contributor who has not seen the document contradict this? All any of us can do us respond to what we are told has taken place.

She has later clarified that she received (whilst she was away) that there was a request for the difference in fares (the correct first course of action IMO).

Then after a period of time she received another letter (presumably due to the lack of response to the first letter) asking for the fare due and the admin fee.

The OP states they read both these letters on the same date when they returned from their daughter's. She the chose to ignore the letters in the hope it would go away.

 

[bb21]

Am I correct in construing Condition 12 to mean that in the OP's circumstances such a penalty could only be demanded if the irregularity occurred in an appproriately designated Penalty Fares area and that this was not here the case?

No, and irrelevant, to answer your two questions.

 

[455driver]

I suppose they could, but should that be the case, they will need to be reported to the DfT for abusing the Byelaws, and potentially can be sued for breach of contract, contrary to Condition 12 of the NRCoC. If they want to issue one of their fixed penalty notices, they should be told where to shove it imo.

NRCoC
If you have an Off-Peak or Super Off-Peak ticket and board a train on which your ticket is not valid, you will only be charged the difference between the fare you have paid and the cheapest valid Anytime or Off-Peak fare for the service concerned.

It sounds as if they sent a letter to the OP requesting the difference in fare, the OP didn't respond so what are Northern supposed to do?

 

[Realfish]

She has later clarified that she received (whilst she was away) that there was a request for the difference in fares (the correct first course of action IMO).

Then after a period of time she received another letter (presumably due to the lack of response to the first letter) asking for the fare due and the admin fee.

The OP states they read both these letters on the same date when they returned from their daughter's. She the chose to ignore the letters in the hope it would go away.

No, the OP says 'fixed penalty notice'

 

[bb21]

It sounds as if they sent a letter to the OP requesting the difference in fare, the OP didn't respond so what are Northern supposed to do?

There has been further clarification by the OP since that post. See my later posts.

 

[455driver]

There has been further clarification by the OP since that post. See my later posts.

Yeah got all that now, cheers.

I suppose it hinges on exactly what ticket the OP asked for (and/or what questions were asked at the time) which is something I don't think will be clarified any time soon.

 

[najaB]

I suppose it hinges on exactly what ticket the OP asked for (and/or what questions were asked at the time) which is something I don't think will be clarified any time soon.

It doesn't. It doesn't matter why the OP ended up with an Off-Peak ticket, what matters is that they didn't pay the excess when it was requested.

 

[ComUtoR]

I think everyone deserves their day in court. If you believe that you are not guilty of an offence then you shouldn't be forced to accept guilt and be criminalised because of it.

Buying tickets should not be a case of caveat emptor. We have started to let people with off peak tickets on the platform but we do let them know that they are not allowed to board.