Son didn't have railcard with him.

[mosaicwarts]

Hello everyone, I am glad to find this site.

My student son telephoned last night because he has received a letter which has scared him to death. He hadn't told me that he travelled without his railcard, was questioned by the inspector and asked to pay a huge sum which he didn't have. He has now received a letter threatening all sorts of frightening sounding things. He is scanning it in to email to me later today.

In October I paid for two return train tickets, Newcastle-Plymouth, with a 16-25 railcard each, for him and his girlfriend to visit Plymouth Uni. I used the on line site trainline, and the trains were both CrossCountry. I gave him money for food etc whilst he was down there.

That morning he got into his car to drive to the station, where he had stored his day pack ready for the journey, and it had gone - amongst other things, it contained his railcard. He was late and in a panic. My husband, his Dad, died last May and he is suffering terribly with his grief. He's just 23. He reported the bag theft and has a crime number, he received a replacement railcard. His girlfriend had her railcard.

He showed the inspector the railcard letter he'd received when he bought it, but had taken the railcard off.

Can I help him?

 

[yorkie]

There isn't enough information to give comprehensive advice. All the necessary detail is lacking. We would need to know the details about what exactly happened and what correspondence has been made.

All I can really say, based on what you said, is to co-operate and ensure the debt is paid and avoid the matter going to court.

 

[6Gman]

Hello everyone, I am glad to find this site.

My student son telephoned last night because he has received a letter which has scared him to death. He hadn't told me that he travelled without his railcard, was questioned by the inspector and asked to pay a huge sum which he didn't have. He has now received a letter threatening all sorts of frightening sounding things. He is scanning it in to email to me later today.

In October I paid for two return train tickets, Newcastle-Plymouth, with a 16-25 railcard each, for him and his girlfriend to visit Plymouth Uni. I used the on line site trainline, and the trains were both CrossCountry. I gave him money for food etc whilst he was down there.

That morning he got into his car to drive to the station, where he had stored his day pack ready for the journey, and it had gone - amongst other things, it contained his railcard. He was late and in a panic. My husband, his Dad, died last May and he is suffering terribly with his grief. He's just 23. He reported the bag theft and has a crime number, he received a replacement railcard. His girlfriend had her railcard.

He showed the inspector the railcard letter he'd received when he bought it, but had taken the railcard off.

Can I help him?

A Railcard-discounted ticket is only valid if presented with the relevant railcard. Therefore he was - legally - travelling without a valid ticket. He was given the opportunity to regularise the position on the journey but was unable to do so.

I suspect that he has now received a letter asking for his explanation of the circumstances which may allow him to negotiate a settlement to the satisfaction of both parties.

The railway will, however, be looking for a convincing credible explanation of the circumstances.

I'm not familiar with the idea of a "day pack" - I presume this was a bag packed for the visit to Plymouth? And that it was left in the car overnight? That it was stolen from the car overnight? And that it contained the Railcard, but not the tickets nor the accompanying letter?

The railway may find this an ... unusual ... sequence of events.

 

[mosaicwarts]

Hello, I'm just back from my voluntary job and he hasn't sent me the letter yet, but I am reassured that co-operation and payment of the debt might avoid court.

I so wish he had phoned me when this had happened so I could have paid immediately.

Do you think it would be helpful if his bereavement counsellor wrote a supporting piece?

My son carries a small backpack around with him with a drink, a book, college work, whatever he needs for his day - and often leaves it in the car as he always keeps his wallet and keys on him. He doesn't have to go into college every day, I'm not sure when he saw it last. I can only speculate that he hadn't locked the car. He is unable to think straight or concentrate at the moment, but I think the counselling is helping him.

Looking at this site has alerted me to lots of rules that I hadn't known about as I'm not a regular train user as I'm scared of the gap. I nearly always book tickets on line but hadn't realised you could not buy a ticket on the train now, good to know.

Thank you for your kind replies.

 

[island]

Just a more general practical note: never use trainline as it sells the same tickets as everyone else but slaps on booking fees and credit card charges.

 

[broadgage]

Strictly speaking, your son would seem to be guilty of travelling without a valid ticket. The ticket held was valid only with a railcard that could not be produced when demanded.

However in this case I feel that a little discretion MIGHT reasonably be shown. Presuming that you/your son receive a letter requesting your version of events I would write back in a suitably contrite way and explain the facts.

I would mention the bereavement, but not unduly stress this, many people suffer loss of close family and still manage to buy valid tickets and to present for inspection both the ticket and any required railcard.

Of much greater relevance IMO is the theft of the bag containing the railcard.

You could point out that there was no intention to deceive, that you genuinely believed that a valid railcard was available, and when buying the tickets you obviously had no idea that the railcard had been stolen or would be stolen shortly before travel.
Support this statement with evidence of the purchase of the original and now stolen railcard, with the police crime reference number, and with details of the replacement railcard.

A penalty fare is probably payable, and whilst they could prosecute it would be very mean spirited under the circumstances.

Before sending the letter, it might be worth posting a draft copy for comment on this forum, taking care to remove personal details.

 

[najaB]

A penalty fare is probably payable, and whilst they could prosecute it would be very mean spirited under the circumstances.

Not likely, given the TOC and route. But I agree that a prosecution is unlikely given the circumstances. In fact, given that the theft of the bag has been reported it wouldn't surprise me if they closed the matter without requiring further payment.

 

[Haywain]

Not likely, given the TOC and route. But I agree that a prosecution is unlikely given the circumstances. In fact, given that the theft of the bag has been reported it wouldn't surprise me if they closed the matter without requiring further payment.

However, the theft of the bag was prior to the start of the journey and the opportunity to 'regularise' the situation before the journey did exist and was mot taken.

 

[najaB]

However, the theft of the bag was prior to the start of the journey and the opportunity to 'regularise' the situation before the journey did exist and was mot taken.

I agree, however I'm hopeful that the TOC will take the unusual circumstances into consideration.

 

[6Gman]

However, the theft of the bag was prior to the start of the journey and the opportunity to 'regularise' the situation before the journey did exist and was mot taken.

This is the element which may result in the TOC being less sympathetic than they might otherwise be.

Chap leaves his day bag in the car overnight, containing his railcard but not his tickets.

Gets into car following morning; bag gone!

Phones police to report incident?

Drives to station to catch train, but doesn't visit booking office to sort issue out.

The OP's son will need to prepare for this to be questioned.

 

[najaB]

This is the element which may result in the TOC being less sympathetic than they might otherwise be.

Agreed, it might. However it is a reasonable assumption that someone might be less 'together' than they might otherwise be if they have just suffered a theft. The OP's son was in the wrong legally speaking, but a letter with just the right tone might elicit some compassion.

 

[mosaicwarts]

Hello, and thank you for all of your advice. I have asked my solicitor if he would be able to help, I am so anxious about this.

My son has an anxiety disorder and is in a dreadful state. In addition to his grief about his Dad, he is also trying to come to terms with having a new half brother, my husband's 41 year old son from his first marriage turned up out of the blue following my husband's death. He was too anxious to tell me about his bag because he knew I'd be angry, my husband and I have repeatedly told him not to leave any valuables in his car. He had to leave college at Christmas as he failed his exam, so cannot even go to Uni now.

This is the text of the letter he has received from Transport Investigations Limited -

"We are agents for the rail company and are in receipt of a report, which advises that on 14/10/2016 a person giving your name and details was spoken to by railway revenue protection staff in connection with a journey between Newcastle and Plymouth for which you showed no valid ticket.

The purpose of this letter is to advise you of the proposed action and to provide the opportunity for any mitigation that you wish to be considered. This must be signed correspondence and can be sent to the address shown above. We will also accept a fax or if you have access to a scanner, we will accept a scanned copy of a signed letter through our email address shown below.

The report of this incident indicates that sufficient evidence does exist to warrant a prosecution in accordance with current legislation. This file is presently with our prosecutions team who are considering whether to issue a Summons for inclusion in a forthcoming Magistrates Court list. These considerations may include whether any charge should allege an offence against Railway Byelaws (2005) or, The Regulation of Railways Act 1889.

In any successful prosecution we will ask the Magistrates to award costs and compensation in favour of the rail company. This will be in addition to any fine that the Magistrates may seek to impose.

If I do not receive any written representation from you within 21 days of the date of this letter, a Summons to a Magistrates Court hearing may be issued without further reference to you."

It's signed by the Administration Caseworker.

 

[mosaicwarts]

Thank you to everyone who has helped me - my solicitor is prepared to help my son, so I won't post again.

I am on a web site for widows, and have told other parents about my son and have suggested they give their adult kids more support than usual during these early days.

 

[AlterEgo]

Don't contact a solicitor. They rarely know anything about (archaic and obscure) Railway Byelaws, and they're not cheap.

Someone from this forum will help you draft a letter back to Transport Investigations. If you look at the whole Disputes area of this forum that's what happens every time.

This is a pretty simple case and you should be able to settle out of court for less than the cost of a single solicitor's letter.

 

[mosaicwarts]

Thank you, I'd really appreciate someone helping me draft a letter.

I have started reading through the whole of this Disputes forum as you suggested.

I will tell my solicitor I won't be instructing him after all. My son hasn't returned the letter authorising him to act yet.

I spoke to my son yesterday. He has not been a regular train user as he has a car, and had not read the terms and conditions of his railcard or realised how serious it was to travel without it.

I'll get an account from him and come back. I'm feeling rather fed up that my car failed its MOT too and just cost £280 to fix, my 60ieth birthday savings are fast approaching zero.

Thank you for your support, times like this I really miss my husband.

 

[mosaicwarts]

My son has talked with his girlfriend and just sent this through.

In 1982 we used to live on a very rough estate in Acton, and this has reminded me of the time my boyfriend (late husband) got into my car (locked) to go to work, and it wouldn't start. Opened the bonnet - someone had stolen my car battery. We then noticed his tracksuit had gone from the back seat of the car. The unexpected and incredibly awful do happen.

This is what my son said happened -

"Bought the railcard
Took card off letter and put it in my bag night before
Morning of journey couldnt find bag or card, almost missed train
Got on train not knowing the rules about the railcard
Asked for ticket and railcard
informed them I had misplaced my card
Staff took my name and address
Staff told us we would be sent a letter asking for proof of railcard
Couldnt find my bag with the rail card
Reported rail card stolen after month of looking

Do you think he might avoid conviction if I help him write a suitably apologetic letter, including these points below which I have adapted from a suggestion made in another post. He has sent me through the copy of the email when he purchased the railcard, as well as the crime reference number for the theft of his bag (which did have his wallet in - he was too embarrassed to tell me, he didn't want me to know how disorganised he is).

Unfortunately he 'thinks' he did previously get a letter regarding 'proof of railcard' and can't find it - I suspect in the blur he's living in it has been lost, he is unclear as to whether he responded.

"1. A statement of the facts of the situation (date, time, journey details, etc.).
2. A recognition that it was foolish to leave the bag in the car which was stolen and the consequence that he travelled without a valid ticket. Short mention of recent loss of father and confusion. From this a commitment to be more careful in future to ensure he always travels with a valid ticket.

Would I offer this? He fully intended taking the railcard with him, he had tried to be organised, he was excited about going.

3. An offer to pay any outstanding fares due, plus an offer to cover any administrative costs that might have been incurred in trying to address the matter.

Thank you.

 

[trentside]

That sounds like a suitable response to me, any of our Fares Advisors or other knowledgable members would be happy to proof read your letter via PM.

We often get people coming here with "sob stories" to mitigate their actions and i'd normally advise leaving that section out but in these circumstances I think your circumstances merit inclusion in the letter as a mitigating factor. As someone who's suffered a recent bereavement I know what it can do to your mental state.

I hope things work out for your son.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Don't contact a solicitor. They rarely know anything about (archaic and obscure) Railway Byelaws

The main context of this post is very helpful to the OP, but I just suggest that there is nothing 'archaic & obscure' about the Department for Transport's National Railways Byelaws which actually date from 2005.

 

[mosaicwarts]

My son has just received this reply in response to his letter explaining why he travelled without his railcard.

Could anyone help me please?


"Reference xxxx - 'Travel on a train without a valid ticket' contrary S5.3.a Regulation of Railways Act (1889).

Thank you for your letter in respect of this case, we have noted your response to our letter and the report of failing to show a valid rail ticket.

It is always the traveller's responsibility to pay the correct fare due and to obtain a valid ticket before boarding any train where pre-purchase facilities are available for the traveller to do so. Where pre-purchase facilities are not available and any person boards a train without a valid ticket, it is always the responsibility of that passenger to declare the journey to on train staff and pay the fare due immediately on boarding any train.

The Rail Company report of this matter alleges that you had failed to pay the correct fare due and had boarded a train with the intention of travelling without having previously paid the correct amount. The company is entitled to consider whether a charge of 'intent to avoid a fare' could be alleged. These are matters that may be summonsed for hearing before a Magistrates Court.

When asked to show a valid ticket, it is alleged that you failed to do so and that you had failed to pay the appropriate fare due in accordance with the rules in force. You did not tender a valid ticket and the company does consider that an attempt to avoid a liability may be alleged. This left the inspector no alternative but to report the incident.

We have enclosed further information detailing the reporting procedure and the rules concerning ticketing and travel. If you wish to make any further comment or representation please do so in writing as soon as possible. We are advised that the Rail Company sees no reason why this matter should not proceed as previously advised.

An application for the issue of a Summons may now be made. if you wish to comment further before this matter proceeds, please respond in writing within 14 days."

Thank you, a very upset Mum.

 

[najaB]

My son has just received this reply in response to his letter explaining why he travelled without his railcard.

Could anyone help me please?

This is your son's last opportunity to explain to the TOC why they shouldn't proceed with a prosecution.

Letters which have been successful tend to include an admission that the rules have been breached, an apology for the time that has had to be spent dealing with the matter, a promise that there won't be a repeat incident and an offer to help recompense for any losses incurred.

There are many forum members who can help proofread anything you intend on sending.

 

[Gareth Marston]

given that from Monday TOC's will allow for missing railcards a refund of the difference between full fare and discounted one on production of the relevant railcard providing the difference is paid prosecuting this one seems a bit pedantic.

 

[mosaicwarts]

Thank you so much for replying, I will give him your advice and post it up on here. Now to walk our dog in the pouring rain, what happened to fun Saturdays.

 

[Jonfun]

given that from Monday TOC's will allow for missing railcards a refund of the difference between full fare and discounted one on production of the relevant railcard providing the difference is paid prosecuting this one seems a bit pedantic.

The OP says the passenger was unable to/unwilling to pay. If he'd have paid there would have been no issue in reclaiming the cost in the form of vouchers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

given that from Monday TOC's will allow for missing railcards a refund of the difference between full fare and discounted one on production of the relevant railcard providing the difference is paid prosecuting this one seems a bit pedantic.

He was given that opportunity, according to the thread, but he couldn't because he didn't have it, and it seems he may have ignored the letter rather than providing, for example, the crime reference and the Railcard receipt in a prompt reply.

There's a life lesson here - don't ignore stuff, it doesn't go away, it just sits there quietly getting worse until it returns to bite.

It is likely that the only way to avoid prosecution under RoRA (and you don't want that, it's a criminal record) will be paying a significant, probably 3 figure, sum.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The OP says the passenger was unable to/unwilling to pay. If he'd have paid there would have been no issue in reclaiming the cost in the form of vouchers.

Just to be clear for future reference from Monday the Conductor or whoever should say if the person can produce evidence of holding valid railcard they can claim back the difference paid as £. However they can only do it once certainly with my TOC.

The OP should just offer to pay rather than fight it and I'm sure it will "go away" in this case.

 

[Gareth Marston]

He was given that opportunity, according to the thread, but he couldn't because he didn't have it, and it seems he may have ignored the letter rather than providing, for example, the crime reference and the Railcard receipt in a prompt reply.

There's a life lesson here - don't ignore stuff, it doesn't go away, it just sits there quietly getting worse until it returns to bite.

It is likely that the only way to avoid prosecution under RoRA (and you don't want that, it's a criminal record) will be paying a significant, probably 3 figure, sum.

Agreed best to make offer and have done.

 

[mosaicwarts]

My son has just sent through the extracts from relevant legislation information, attached.

TIL are referring to s5.3 a?

My son had no intention of travelling without paying his fare, I bought and paid for his train ticket. He bought and paid for his railcard but lost it.

When he writes can he dispute this 'category'?

 

[StarCrossing]

My son had no intention of travelling without paying his fare, I bought and paid for his train ticket. He bought and paid for his railcard but lost it.

When he writes can he dispute this 'category'?

Once he lost his railcard, the correct fare became the undiscounted ticket that the guard tried to sell him. Refusing to purchase this would probably be their evidence of his intention to avoid paying his fare.

 

[mosaicwarts]

Now I've had a chance to speak to my son further, it seems the first inspector just asked for his name and address and said he would have to show proof that he was in possession of a railcard.

The second inspector asked for the money, but my son said he had already given his name and address.

It's a horrible lesson for me. Because I nag my son to be organised, he didn't tell me about this until the letter arrived, as he was ashamed he'd messed up.

 

[najaB]

Now I've had a chance to speak to my son further, it seems the first inspector just asked for his name and address and said he would have to show proof that he was in possession of a railcard.

The second inspector asked for the money, but my son said he had already given his name and address.

Unfortunately, depending on exactly what he said to the second inspector he could be seen to be in breach of the RoRA - it could count as refusing to pay his fare.

It would be worth clarifying this point in your letter as they might not be aware of the content of both conversions. The fact that he was given conflicting information by the two staff members may be recognised as a reason for leniency.