More Penalty Notice misery. Advice please...

[RobC]

Hi Guys and gals

On 12th May I received a penalty notice from Southern Railways, really for not tapping my oyster card twice, or not hearing it bleep twice at Faringdon station in rush hour. There was sufficient credit on my oyster card.

I received a Penalty notice, and on 23rd got a letter asking to confirm I was the person who received and asking me to submit an explanation.

I sent them this as a reply, which in retrospect was a bit fiery, but entirely truthful:

"Dear Sirs


On the 12th May I was issued with a penalty fare notice using my Oyster Card.

The officer refused to give me his name, but his badge number according to the ticket is EXXXXX.

I had topped up my oyster card by £13.00 the night before and used a bus once, believing I had enough to get to and from St Mary Cray to Liverpool Street via Faringdon, starting at 10.05am.

I checked in on the platform at Faringdon for the last leg of the journey, and as far as I was concerned, the stand alone un-barriered machine bleeped successfully twice, firstly to close my Tube journey, and secondly to start my train journey. The actual machine said £2.30 (£2.40), and I assumed £2.40 was my balance (as I rarely get trains). The noise on the platform in rush hour at Faringdon was excessively loud, and the officer wouldn’t accept that I had used my Oyster card twice in quick succession, (and apparently they don’t keep records of failed check-ins, which I find very hard to believe)

I explained to the officer concerned that I’ve had three brain haemorrhages in the last year, and had had major brain surgery in January, which makes me a bit scatty when it comes to figures. Other officers nearby were very sympathetic and were suggesting to the officer that they should leave it and move onto the next station. His disgust that I didn’t have £20 (only 60p) handy to pay him on the spot was quite abhorrent, and the whole procedure of giving him my name and address was quite humiliating and lengthy, and a potential trigger for my brain problem. I have to eat at certain points of the day, and his insistence delayed my doing so by 20-25 minutes. I was so stressed out about the whole incident, that I had a seizure less than 48 hours later, and spent the night in Kings College Hospital, Locksbottom.

I’m quite frankly disgusted at a) the officer concerned, and his apparent commission grabbing nature regardless of the circumstances, and b) the procedure where you are assumed to have committed an offence. The administration costs of this alone will far outweigh the proceeds, and I will fight this all the way to court out of principle, if my health allows."

A week or so later, I caved in and thought I should pay the fine, to avoid more stress, as it really doesn't do wonderful things with my brain injury. I logged onto the website, and typed in the Penalty notice number and my surname, and it said there was no record of it (it still does). I tried to phone them but was kept in a queue for 20 minutes and gave up. I was told by someone at the station that they've probably cancelled the notice.

Up until today I've had no communication from them, and was kindly greeted by a 'Single Justice Procedure Notice' from Barkingside Magistrates Court, with a fine of £125, and a criminal record if I plead guilty? I also note this has conveniently arrived two days after I can access my Oyster journey records (as it only keeps two months)

What are my sensible options, as I don't think my brain could withstand a court appearance, and I'm struggling to understand how I deserve a penalty notice..

Just to clarify the Faringdon tube sort of rolls onto the rail platform without an oyster point until you hit the rail platform.

 

[yorkie]

I had topped up my oyster card by £13.00 the night before and used a bus once, believing I had enough to get to and from St Mary Cray to Liverpool Street via Faringdon, starting at 10.05am.

That journey is priced at £5.30. It sounds from your later statements that it was on your return journey that your problem occurred, ie Liverpool St to St Mary Cray.

I checked in on the platform at Faringdon for the last leg of the journey, and as far as I was concerned, the stand alone un-barriered machine bleeped successfully twice, firstly to close my Tube journey, and secondly to start my train journey. The actual machine said £2.30 (£2.40), and I assumed £2.40 was my balance (as I rarely get trains).

There is no requirement to tap on the standalone readers at Farringdon. Unfortunately these standalone readers can cause badly trained revenue inspection officers, which includes some employed by the train company who you are in dispute with (Govia ThameslinK Railway) to wrongly think you have tapped out. See http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/same-station-continuation-exits/

£2.40 was the cost of the journey at that point, so far.

The noise on the platform in rush hour at Faringdon was excessively loud, and the officer wouldn’t accept that I had used my Oyster card twice in quick succession, (and apparently they don’t keep records of failed check-ins, which I find very hard to believe)

They'd not cut it on this forum, but such staff can be found unjustifiably issuing Penalty Fares as there are insufficient safeguards in place to prevent it.

I explained to the officer concerned that I’ve had three brain haemorrhages in the last year, and had had major brain surgery in January, which makes me a bit scatty when it comes to figures.

Not gonna make a difference with some of them.

Other officers nearby were very sympathetic and were suggesting to the officer that they should leave it and move onto the next station.

Yes, GTR do employ some good revenue staff, so that is good to hear that they weren't all bad!

His disgust that I didn’t have £20 (only 60p) handy to pay him on the spot was quite abhorrent

There is no requirement to pay the penalty fare on the spot; he is making that up. Again there are insufficient safeguards in place to prevent revenue inspectors from making such demands. Also there are inadequate safeguards in place to ensure people with appropriate temperaments get the job.

and the whole procedure of giving him my name and address was quite humiliating and lengthy, and a potential trigger for my brain problem. I have to eat at certain points of the day, and his insistence delayed my doing so by 20-25 minutes. I was so stressed out about the whole incident, that I had a seizure less than 48 hours later, and spent the night in Kings College Hospital, Locksbottom.

I'd consider consulting a solicitor about that.

I’m quite frankly disgusted at a) the officer concerned, and his apparent commission grabbing nature regardless of the circumstances, and b) the procedure where you are assumed to have committed an offence.

a) isn't surprising for me. as for b) you have not ben accused of committing an offence; a Penalty Fare is a charge issued to someone who is considered to be making a mistake under certain circumstances, which in this case you didn't make any mistake. The inspector was mistaken. It's not a level playing field.

The administration costs of this alone will far outweigh the proceeds, and I will fight this all the way to court out of principle, if my health allows."

Glad to hear it

A week or so later, I caved in and thought I should pay the fine, to avoid more stress, as it really doesn't do wonderful things with my brain injury. I logged onto the website, and typed in the Penalty notice number and my surname, and it said there was no record of it (it still does). I tried to phone them but was kept in a queue for 20 minutes and gave up. I was told by someone at the station that they've probably cancelled the notice.

I agree they have cancelled it as they are prosecuting you instead.

Up until today I've had no communication from them, and was kindly greeted by a 'Single Justice Procedure Notice' from Barkingside Magistrates Court, with a fine of £125, and a criminal record if I plead guilty? I also note this has conveniently arrived two days after I can access my Oyster journey records (as it only keeps two months)

I'm not sure what to advise regarding the Oyster records, but assuming it showed you tapping out correctly at St Mary Cray (you don't make this clear, but I am assuming this is the case?), then this is absolutely vital evidence which would clearly exonerate you from any suggestion of wrongdoing (whether deliberate or not).

What are my sensible options, as I don't think my brain could withstand a court appearance, and I'm struggling to understand how I deserve a penalty notice..

Just to clarify the Faringdon tube sort of rolls onto the rail platform without an oyster point until you hit the rail platform.

Yes, it's not even a tube train, it's a full-size train which happens to be part of LU these days. It's a cross-platform interchange in this direction, and there is no requirement to tap on any reader. However tapping on the reader should not incur a penalty, but as described above, does confuse some poorly trained revenue staff, leading to you being mistreated by Govia Thameslink Railway, who are by far the absolute worst train operating company in the UK. I wish you all the best luck fighting them.

 

[najaB]

What are my sensible options, as I don't think my brain could withstand a court appearance, and I'm struggling to understand how I deserve a penalty notice.

Did your Oyster history show that you had correctly tapped in/out or not - that's the key information, the rest is noise.

The fact that it is now beyond the two-month window visible online is likely not a problem as I'm pretty sure TfL can provide history going further back if needed.

 

[yorkie]

Did your Oyster history show that you had correctly tapped in/out or not - that's the key information, the rest is noise.

The fact that it is now beyond the two-month window visible online is likely not a problem as I'm pretty sure TfL can provide history going further back if needed.

I'm not so sure...

https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/privacy-and-cookies/oyster-card

We retain data about the individual journeys made using your Oyster card for eight weeks after the card is used. After eight weeks, the journey data in the ticketing system is disassociated from your card (ie anonymised). This eight-week period is considered reasonable to enable customers to verify or make enquiries concerning their journeys (for example, for refund purposes).

I would have taken screenshots at the time.

That said, it's perhaps possible that an anonymised copy might be obtainable if the date, time, origin & destination are all known, maybe...?

 

[najaB]

I'm not so sure...

I know that's the stated policy but, if anything, it would make their prosecutions more difficult if they couldn't provide any evidence to support their case. Even if it is, as you suggested, a copy of the specific journeys concerned.

 

[RobC]

I'm not so sure...

https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/privacy-and-cookies/oyster-card
I would have taken screenshots at the time.

That said, it's perhaps possible that an anonymised copy might be obtainable if the date, time, origin & destination are all known, maybe...?

I really wish I had, and have tried to phone TFL to see if I can get the screenshot. I wrong assumed that the lack of communication, and the fact that I couldn't find it on their website to either pay it or dispute it meant that they had just wiped it. I have a screenshot of my attempt to find the ticket on their site, and it saying it didn't exist.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm sure that I should be able to get a back dated copy of my travel on 12th May from TFL, if I can get through to them.

It's just really annoying as I have so many more important things to do.

Ironically, I did put the £13 oyster receipt in for expenses, as I was doing voluntary work for a charity that day.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The ticket is actually issued by Southeastern Railways. Is Govia the same?

There were a gang of them at the station, and a couple of Law enforcement people.

 

[yorkie]

Ironically, I did put the £13 oyster receipt in for expenses, as I was doing voluntary work for a charity that day.

Sounds like you did obtain evidence of £7.70 (peak) and £5.30 (off peak) journeys, totalling £13, from St Mary Cray to Liverpool Street & return? If so, evidence which is sufficient for an expense claim may well be sufficient for your dispute. Do you have a copy of this?

The ticket is actually issued by Southeastern Railways. Is Govia the same?

There were a gang of them at the station, and a couple of Law enforcement people.

Govia is the parent company of three train operating companies, namely Govia Thameslink Railway (which operates trains on their Southern, Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Great Northern routes), London Midland and Southeastern.

 

[RobC]

I'm not sure what to advise regarding the Oyster records, but assuming it showed you tapping out correctly at St Mary Cray (you don't make this clear, but I am assuming this is the case?), then this is absolutely vital evidence which would clearly exonerate you from any suggestion of wrongdoing (whether deliberate or not).

I didn't get the chance to tap out, as I'd been issued with the fine prior to getting to the machine. After that, I got home as quickly as possible, in order to eat.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sounds like you did obtain evidence of £7.70 (peak) and £5.30 (off peak) journeys, totalling £13, from St Mary Cray to Liverpool Street & return? If so, evidence which is sufficient for an expense claim may well be sufficient for your dispute. Do you have a copy of this?
Govia is the parent company of three train operating companies, namely Govia Thameslink Railway (which operates trains on their Southern, Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Great Northern routes), London Midland and Southeastern.

I cannot give you the exact times but it was all off peak. The expense claim I put in was for topping up my Oyster card with £13 the night before in order to do the whole journey. The charity are decent people and wouldn't dispute I'd topped up the night before.

 

[yorkie]

I didn't get the chance to tap out, as I'd been issued with the fine prior to getting to the machine.

Had you been able to tap out, you'd have been charged the correct fare.

Did they physically prevent you tapping out, or encourage you not to, or did you choose not to?

Do you have a transcript of the conversation that took place?

I cannot give you the exact times but it was all off peak. The expense claim I put in was for topping up my Oyster card with £13 the night before in order to do the whole journey. The charity are decent people and wouldn't dispute I'd topped up the night before.

Ah, from your reply above I had hoped you had submitted evidence of an expense claim totalling £13 in journeys, and this evidence would have clearly exonerated you. As it's clear there is no such evidence, that makes things a lot harder than it could have been.

You should win, but the system is absurdly stacked up against you.

 

[RobC]

Had you been able to tap out, you'd have been charged the correct fare.

Did they physically prevent you tapping out, or encourage you not to, or did you choose not to?


Do you have a transcript of the conversation that took place?




You should win, but the system is absurdly stacked up against you.

They were about 5 yards before the tap out point in a line with handheld machines. I offered to tap out, but was prevented from doing so. Even if allowed to do so, the tap out can actually overdraw you, which has happened before. You are allowed £1.50 overdraft, although it has taken more before. So in short, I was prevented.

I haven't got a transcript of the conversation that took place. I said a lot to him,including some unpublishable words. In the legal document he decided I had said 'NO COMMENT'.

It appears to be the case. It's close to highway robbery. If I had £20-£30 quid in notes, then St MC station is really not the best place to walk out of, carrying cash.

 

[yorkie]

They were about 5 yards before the tap out point in a line with handheld machines. I offered to tap out, but was prevented from doing so. Even if allowed to do so, the tap out can actually overdraw you, which has happened before.

As I said, the system would have charged you the correct amount for your journey from Liverpool St to St Mary Cray (£5.30 off peak or £7.70 peak). You would not have gone overdrawn. It was wrong for them to prevent you from using the reader to pay the correct fare.

When you said earlier you were issued the Penalty Fare for "for not tapping my oyster card twice, or not hearing it bleep twice at Faringdon station in rush hour", did they actually say that? If so, that's ludicrous. If they actually knew their job properly they'd have said that you didn't need to tap at all, but any number of taps at Farringdon would make no difference to the fact that if you had simply tapped out at St Mary Cray, the correct fare would be charged.

You need to speak to a solicitor urgently.

 

[furlong]

You might seek two things: Firstly the record of touches they hold for your Oyster card for the day concerned - I can't really see how this wouldn't be evidence that they would be expected to preserve for the court to examine. (If you made other similar journeys on previous dates, records of them may also assist to show you made similar sequences of touches before and were charged the correct fare without being advised that you had done anything wrong.) Secondly, "expert" evidence to show that the correct fare would have been charged had you not been prevented from touching out.

I'd definitely recommend using a solicitor to argue your case if this proceeds to court as the arguments could become complicated. Technically, your reply posted here suggests you might have been using Oyster incorrectly, but this is so poorly communicated to the public that the system seems to correct for it automatically - in effect implicitly authorising its use in this way (which I think could be the line that yorkie has taken in his replies).

 

[MikeWh]

I know that's the stated policy but, if anything, it would make their prosecutions more difficult if they couldn't provide any evidence to support their case. Even if it is, as you suggested, a copy of the specific journeys concerned.

It is a fact that they do not keep records of journey history after 8 weeks. If TfL were prosecuting then I would expect that a record would have been produced before the history was cleared, but in this case it is Southeastern who will be relying on the evidence of the RPIs. They will say that the reader said the card was touched out.

RobC:
I successfully managed to assist someone in a similar position a few years ago when they had double touched at Finsbury Park. They were being penalty fared by FCC who didn't have a clue about the continuation exit issue. The key evidence in this case was a letter from TfL confirming that a touch at Finsbury Park would not completely close the journey, and that a second touch would not restart a new journey.

I agree with advice above that you need to seek legal help. You will need to get a letter from TfL explaining that while a touch at Farringdon will show you as finishing the journey there, a further touch anywhere within maximum journey time from Liverpool Street would extend your journey to that new station. The handheld readers are supposed to be able to detect continuation exit, but I wonder whether St Mary Cray was sufficiently far away from Farringdon that there might have been a problem with their readers. There certainly wouldn't have been a problem if you'd touched out as normal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no requirement to pay the penalty fare on the spot

I thought there *was* a requirement to pay the amount of the Anytime (Day) Single fare for the journey made up front, otherwise a Penalty Fare is not applicable. The balance is of course payable later.

 

[matt_world2004]

Assuming the customer tapped in at Liverpool street there is no requirement to tap again at farringdon even if the customer does its a continuation exit and males no difference to what happens when you tap out at St Mary cray

 

[swt_passenger]

Assuming the customer tapped in at Liverpool street there is no requirement to tap again at farringdon even if the customer does its a continuation exit and males no difference to what happens when you tap out at St Mary cray

That's exactly how it is known to work, but the real question here is can an RPI's checking device tell the difference between a normal exit and a continuation exit?

This question may have come up previously, but I assume if there is no further touch out the continuation exit expires somehow?

 

[Haywain]

Govia is the parent company of three train operating companies, namely Govia Thameslink Railway (which operates trains on their Southern, Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Great Northern routes), London Midland and Southeastern.

Southeastern is a company owned by Govia, but it is not part of GTR. I fear that you leapt to conclusions about the company involved before having the full story.

We still don't know if the problem was that there was not an apparent touch in for the journey, or there was insufficient balance on the Oyster card. However, my view is that it is the former, and I think it is poor practice to carry out revenue checks in advance of a gateline (particularly where Oyster is accepted), if St Mary Cray has automatic ticket gates.

Edit:
There are no gates at St Mary Cray, and it looks like it would be very difficult to do a revenue check before customers reached the Oyster readers.

 

[MikeWh]

Southeastern is a company owned by Govia, but it is not part of GTR. I fear that you leapt to conclusions about the company involved before having the full story.

Bear in mind that the train travelled on is operated by GTR under their Thameslink banner and you can see where confusion could arise.

We still don't know if the problem was that there was not an apparent touch in for the journey, or there was insufficient balance on the Oyster card. However, my view is that it is the former,

It's possible, but why would the RPI cite not touching in if the problem was insufficient funds?

and I think it is poor practice to carry out revenue checks in advance of a gateline (particularly where Oyster is accepted), if St Mary Cray has automatic ticket gates.

Edit:
There are no gates at St Mary Cray, and it looks like it would be very difficult to do a revenue check before customers reached the Oyster readers.

For contactless cards every revenue check MUST take place while the customer should be touched in. Therefore the check probably took place just before the validators such that the inspectors could invite people to touch out where appropriate, or not in the case of an invalidated Oyster card.

 

[Deerfold]

Southeastern is a company owned by Govia, but it is not part of GTR.

That's what the quote from Yorkie says.

 

[robbeech]

So,

I'm a little confused as to what the offence is.

Are they saying you had tapped out at Farringdon?
Are they saying you didn't have enough money on your oyster card to cover tapping out at St Mary Cray?
Are they suggesting something else?


If its the Farringdon issue then we can understand this to a point. Link provided earlier states,

Secondly there may be a problem with National Rail RPIs. The exit touch removes the maximum fare which is what the RPIs are looking for when they check the card using a hand-held reader. If at all possible you should only touch out and back in again at an interchange station if it is absolutely necessary, usually because one or both parts of the station are protected by gates.

my bold.
If this is the case, then an explanation ought to be sufficient and successfully tapping out at St Mary Cray ought to have made the problem go away.


In the case of you not having sufficient funds to tap out, then they're probably within their rights to give you a penalty fare. We have all done the maths in our head, and it seems to work out ok, but we don't know if there are any other transactions that we are unaware of. the bus was £1.50 we assume, but we cannot be sure if the balance before you topped up was £0.00, or a positive value, or indeed a negative value. If you had -£4.20 on the card before you topped up then there would be insufficient funds to complete the journey.

There will, believe it or not have been people that have started at a station like Liverpool Street, gone to Farringdon, Tapped 'out' there and then gone on to a station in Zone 5 or 6 with no gateline. They will take a chance that there is nobody there checking and will get away with paying £2.40 for the journey. There are likely people that do this every day, the saving soon adds up. I am in no way whatsoever suggesting this is what is happening here, but it gives an idea as to why an RPI might be strict upon someone who has evidently tapped out at Farringdon and has ended up in St Mary Cray.

The bottom line with the greatest of respect is that on the day in question, you didn't tap out at St Mary Cray and therefore were not charged the correct fare for the journey you had made. It could be argued that you evaded the fare between Farringdon and St Mary Cray of £2.90 (or £3.80 as a single off peak fare). Whether this is unfair due to your incident with the RPI or not is likely to be decided in court.

I certainly wish you well with the result of this, they should have known your intentions.

 

[MikeWh]

The bottom line with the greatest of respect is that on the day in question, you didn't tap out at St Mary Cray and therefore were not charged the correct fare for the journey you had made. It could be argued that you evaded the fare between Farringdon and St Mary Cray of £2.90 (or £3.80 as a single off peak fare). Whether this is unfair due to your incident with the RPI or not is likely to be decided in court.

I certainly wish you well with the result of this, they should have known your intentions.

The bottom line is that the OP was prevented from touching out at St Mary Cray. This is an unfortunate side-effect of the contactless issue; in the old days they would check your card/ticket after you had walked past the validator.

 

[RobC]

Cheers gents. I have spent about an hour of my working day trying to contact CAB, and also trying to get free legal advice unsuccessfully.

By the far the most useful advice has come from here, but I'll keep pursuing my options over the weekend.

Just to clarify, I was stopped by the inspector at the top of the stairs with his RPI (a term I have learned in 48 hours) and about three yards before the standalone check-out point. He wouldn't let me go to the checkout point.

 

[Agent_c]

Cheers gents. I have spent about an hour of my working day trying to contact CAB, and also trying to get free legal advice unsuccessfully.

By the far the most useful advice has come from here, but I'll keep pursuing my options over the weekend.

Just to clarify, I was stopped by the inspector at the top of the stairs with his RPI (a term I have learned in 48 hours) and about three yards before the standalone check-out point. He wouldn't let me go to the checkout point.

You can access the public facing version of the information system used in CAB's here:

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/

But I dare say it wont have much more than they can tell you here.

 

[RobC]

I checked in on the platform at Faringdon for the last leg of the journey, and as far as I was concerned, the stand alone un-barriered machine bleeped successfully twice, firstly to close my Tube journey, and secondly to start my train journey. The actual machine said £2.30 (£2.40), and I assumed £2.40 was my balance (as I rarely get trains). The noise on the platform in rush hour at Faringdon was excessively loud, and the officer wouldn’t accept that I had used my Oyster card twice in quick succession, (and apparently they don’t keep records of failed check-ins, which I find very hard to believe)

Right, just to clarify this, £2.40 is the tube journey, effectively completed. £2.30 was the balance on the card (I do remember this clearly, and wrote it down that night in my post ticket rage). So effectively, with the £1.50 I am allowed to overspill by on a standard Oyster card, I have in theory £3.80 on the card, and the journey cost between Farringdon and St MC is £3.80. So I have a bloody good case it looks like. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Now the ticket says "Journey from Liverpool Street to St Mary Cray' erroneously. I had tapped out at Farringdon, and it had charged me £2.40 on the short tube journey. I can only assume the Inspector thought his version of my journey would have cost £5.30 (as he was looking at LS to StMC). As its impossible to get on a tube at LS without tapping in, or jumping the barrier etc etc, and the fact that I had tapped out at Farringdon, surely the officer concerned can check the Farringdon bit of my journey?

I believe I have a strong case, despite all this being incredibly confusing.

 

[matt_world2004]

Any Letter you send, I would recommend you say that you used the Oyster validator on the platform at Farringdon, do not use the term continuation exit.

 

[RobC]

Thanks.


I've actually spent most of the day thinking 'perhaps I was wrong' in my scattiness.

After not being allowed to tap out and storming out of the station, I do remember having enough credit and overspill to get 2 and a bit buses the following Monday.

I wish I'd tapped out though, in retrospect, even if I'd waited for them to leave.

 

[jumble]

Cheers gents. I have spent about an hour of my working day trying to contact CAB, and also trying to get free legal advice unsuccessfully.

By the far the most useful advice has come from here, but I'll keep pursuing my options over the weekend.

Just to clarify, I was stopped by the inspector at the top of the stairs with his RPI (a term I have learned in 48 hours) and about three yards before the standalone check-out point. He wouldn't let me go to the checkout point.

I am very confused by some elements of this situation

Please forgive if my understanding is incorrect

1 The RPI refused to allow you to touch out which presumably would have shown him either red or green

2 It is not clear if you touched out at St MC even after the RPI had PFed you

3 You unfortunately have no evidence of what actually happened with this journey at its conclusion

4 There was no record of your PF on the website one week after it was issued. This is somewhat strange.

5 There has been no communication what ever except for the single Justice procedure which also seems a bit odd as My impression is that TOCs almost always give the defendant the opportunity to state their side of the story before being taken to court.

Is it possible that the RPI felt threatened ( I said a lot to him,including some unpublishable words!) that he withdrew the PF and suggested to prosecutions that this go straight to court to try teach you a lesson?

It is my view that in conflict with Police etc if at all possible it is much better to be quiet at the time and complain later as I suspect one will never win.
I personally had a summons cancelled by the police when one misbehaved but I am sure that if I had kicked off I would have been arrested at the time
( Having said this I am not judging you at all as all circumstance and people are different and I have no wish to be personal)

In you shoes I might be tempted write and politely and in terms of slight bewilderment ask the prosecution dept

Why was the PF not on the website ?

Might it have been fairer to write to you for your side of the story so you would know the mysterious man at the station who told you the PF probably had been cancelled was mistaken and so you would know that you should get the crucial print out from TFL in time ?

Why were you not allowed to touch out as this would have given the RPI the definative answer as to whether the system had behaved properly

Are they aware that Brain injuries can make people appear drunk and aggressive?

depending on the response follow the advice from other posters and get a solicitor

I wish you luck as you have clearly had a very bad time

 

[yorkie]

I thought there *was* a requirement to pay the amount of the Anytime (Day) Single fare for the journey made up front, otherwise a Penalty Fare is not applicable. The balance is of course payable later.

The single fare is payable but not the full penalty fare. Though how this can be applicable in the case of Oyster is debatable, and of course in this instance a PF was not appropriate anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Assuming the customer tapped in at Liverpool street there is no requirement to tap again at farringdon even if the customer does its a continuation exit and males no difference to what happens when you tap out at St Mary cray

agreed
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's exactly how it is known to work, but the real question here is can an RPI's checking device tell the difference between a normal exit and a continuation exit?

See: http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/same-station-continuation-exits/

...there may be a problem with National Rail RPIs. The exit touch removes the maximum fare which is what the RPIs are lookimg for when they check the card using a hand-held reader....

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Southeastern is a company owned by Govia, but it is not part of GTR. I fear that you leapt to conclusions about the company involved before having the full story.

The OP said "from Southern Railways", which is a route brand name used by GTR, nothing to do with a conclusion; that's simply being given incorrect information.

However I agree with MikeWh that it is easy to see how confusion has arisen. GTR do cause a lot of brand confusion, and this is made even worse by their mixing with Southeastern and the fact the two companies are owned by Govia. No wonder passengers are confused (and before anyone complains, yes I do accept the DfT have ultimately caused this)

... I think it is poor practice to carry out revenue checks in advance of a gateline (particularly where Oyster is accepted)....

I strongly agree, or if they must do this, they should at least let people tap out in the circumstances described. Whatever the difficulties, treating passengers in the way that has been described is totally unacceptable.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Right, just to clarify this, £2.40 is the tube journey, effectively completed. £2.30 was the balance on the card (I do remember this clearly, and wrote it down that night in my post ticket rage). So effectively, with the £1.50 I am allowed to overspill by on a standard Oyster card, I have in theory £3.80 on the card, and the journey cost between Farringdon and St MC is £3.80. So I have a bloody good case it looks like. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The fare for your journey was £5.30. When you tapped at Farringdon (which there was no need to do, but I can understand how you didn't realise that, and you should not be penalised for this) you had thus far been charged £2.40 (ie, your total charge should have been £2.90 higher than this when you tapped out at the end of your journey). The fare between Farringdon & St Mary Cray is not relevant as that was not the journey you were making.

Now the ticket says "Journey from Liverpool Street to St Mary Cray' erroneously. I had tapped out at Farringdon, and it had charged me £2.40 on the short tube journey. I can only assume the Inspector thought his version of my journey would have cost £5.30 (as he was looking at LS to StMC). As its impossible to get on a tube at LS without tapping in, or jumping the barrier etc etc, and the fact that I had tapped out at Farringdon, surely the officer concerned can check the Farringdon bit of my journey?

I believe I have a strong case, despite all this being incredibly confusing.

Yes, it would have cost £5.30 and been resolved correctly if he had let you tap out!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Any Letter you send, I would recommend you say that you used the Oyster validator on the platform at Farringdon, do not use the term continuation exit.

Agreed! That said, you could mention you have subsequently learnt about the concept, but it would be better to simply include the relevant quote from TfL (see earlier post by MikeWh where it was mentioned TfL produced a letter for someone else under similar circumstances involving Finsbury Park)

 

[RobC]

I am very confused by some elements of this situation

Please forgive if my understanding is incorrect

1 The RPI refused to allow you to touch out which presumably would have shown him either red or green

2 It is not clear if you touched out at St MC even after the RPI had PFed you

3 You unfortunately have no evidence of what actually happened with this journey at its conclusion

4 There was no record of your PF on the website one week after it was issued. This is somewhat strange.

5 There has been no communication what ever except for the single Justice procedure which also seems a bit odd as My impression is that TOCs almost always give the defendant the opportunity to state their side of the story before being taken to court.

Is it possible that the RPI felt threatened ( I said a lot to him,including some unpublishable words!) that he withdrew the PF and suggested to prosecutions that this go straight to court to try teach you a lesson?

It is my view that in conflict with Police etc if at all possible it is much better to be quiet at the time and complain later as I suspect one will never win.
I personally had a summons cancelled by the police when one misbehaved but I am sure that if I had kicked off I would have been arrested at the time
( Having said this I am not judging you at all as all circumstance and people are different and I have no wish to be personal)

In you shoes I might be tempted write and politely and in terms of slight bewilderment ask the prosecution dept

Why was the PF not on the website ?

Might it have been fairer to write to you for your side of the story so you would know the mysterious man at the station who told you the PF probably had been cancelled was mistaken and so you would know that you should get the crucial print out from TFL in time ?

Why were you not allowed to touch out as this would have given the RPI the definative answer as to whether the system had behaved properly

Are they aware that Brain injuries can make people appear drunk and aggressive?

depending on the response follow the advice from other posters and get a solicitor

I wish you luck as you have clearly had a very bad time

Just to reply to most of these points.

1) The RPI wouldn't let me touch out. He was stopping me going near it, as it was about three yards behind him, and he was at the top of the stairs. I believe I asked something along the lines of 'Can I just tap out?' and the reply was that I was already getting a ticket.

2) I've stated a few times, that I didn't touch out after the incident. After being kept there for 20-25 minutes I really needed to get home and take my medication.

3) I wasn't with anyone at the time, and by the time the RPI had dallied about any lay passengers had long gone.

4) and 5) There was no record on the website of the PF on the 23rd May, when I received a letter asking me to confirm my name address etc, and attach comments. The comments I attached are at the top of this thread. I received no further communication until the 'Single Justice Procedure Notice' which arrived yesterday, 6-7 weeks later.

The RPI was with four or five officers, and two PCSO's, who didn't bat an eyelid. I'm not an aggressive person, and explained to the RPI the nature of my brain surgery, pointing out the two indents in my forehead which are surgery scars.

 

[swt_passenger]

Are you completely sure you were given a PF notice? You wouldn't normally get asked for comments by post later after a PF would you?