Pre Court Settlement for forgetting Railcard.

[Mottsy]

My daughter was stopped by a revenue protection inspectors at Reading Railway Station on 10th June 2017.

At the time she had purchased a discounted ticket, from Wokingham to Reading wrongly believing she had her railcard with her

Upon being stopped sherealised she had left her valid railcard at her boyfriends address in Reading. She texted her boyfriend who texted back a photograph of the railcard and also stated he would attend the station with it straight away. (He lives in the town centre so this would have taken 10 mins at most). For some reason this was not acceptable to the Revenue Protection Inspector.

She has have now received a “Pre-Court Settlement Offer which is only available till 7 July 2017.

She must pay £84.25 which is £4.25 for the full price ticket and £80 “Admin Fee”. If not paid by 7 July it will be doubled and court proceedings started.
She still has the text message with the photo saved and it is dated and timed so there is no reason not to believe her version of events.

What can she do. This seems way OTT for a genuine mistake.

Thanks in advance

 

[sheff1]

If this is the first time she has forgotten the card then this http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2017/469772179-2017-03-21.html says she would be "guaranteed" a refund of the extra fare paid if she subsequently produced the railcard.

This does not tally with a request for a "Pre-court settlement", so it seems to me that either something else happened on the day, over and above what she has told you, or the Rail Company is not following the agreed rules.

 

[AlterEgo]

OP: did your daughter refuse to pay for another ticket? Was that option of purchasing another ticket offered to her?

 

[najaB]

What can she do. This seems way OTT for a genuine mistake.

The correct course of action was for the inspector to ask her to purchase a new full-price ticket which would be refunded on presentation of the railcard. Do you know if she was offered this opportunity?

 

[Mottsy]

The correct course of action was for the inspector to ask her to purchase a new full-price ticket which would be refunded on presentation of the railcard. Do you know if she was offered this opportunity?

She says she offered to pay the full price ticket by this was refused by the inspector.

She also states this is the first time she has ever had a problem.

 

[Mottsy]

Just checked with my daughter.

She is adamant that this is the fist time it has occurred and nothing else happened over and above what has been said. (Apart from her emptying her handbag on the floor to search for the card as she was sure she had it in her purse).

I even asked her if she gave any attitude to the Inspector and she said, "No, I just cried a lot".

In fairness I've never known her be anything but courteous to everyone so I would have been surprised if she had given any attitude.

So if the correct procedure has not been complied with I will obviously get her to contact GWR Prosecutions Department. However my main concern is the tight deadline.

If she does not pay by the 7 July will the amount be doubled.

How long will they take to respond to her email. (I can only find an email address for them).

Thanks for the help thus far.

 

[Mottsy]

She's sent me a copy of the text message from the night. It is dated and timed.

I cant figure out how to add a copy here, but it confirms everything she says.

The boyfriend sent a photo of the card that is clear and legible, and says he's on his way to the station with the card.
He lives a ten minute walk away so would have been there in less than that as he would have ran.

 

[najaB]

So if the correct procedure has not been complied with I will obviously get her to contact GWR Prosecutions Department. However my main concern is the tight deadline.

It does sound like something has gone wrong. If you don't get a prompt reply to your email, due to the tight deadline I suggest that you write to them stating that you believe the correct process was not followed and enclose two cheques: one for the correct fare, and the other for the amount requested.

Hopefully good sense will prevail and they will only cash the cheque for the lesser amount. If they cash the larger cheque then you can start engaging with their Customer Services team to get it refunded.

 

[cjmillsnun]

You need her to get a letter together stating the facts (please ask her to try and keep emotion out of this).

She needs to state that she did indeed forget her railcard, that she is sorry for any inconvenience caused by this and although it was not intentional, that she will ensure that she always has it when travelling with a railcard discounted ticket in future.

She also needs to state that she offered to pay for a non discounted fare, but this was refused by the RPI.

She then needs to draw attention to the RDG link and state that she was not offered this "fairer deal" and would've been able to successfully claim the refund that was offered under this deal (she should prove this by sending a colour copy of her railcard and photocard showing that it was valid on the date of travel)

She should then enclose two cheques. One for £4.25 and one for £80. They shoudn't cash either but return both.

If they are nice, they will not cash either. They may well cash the one for £4.25. If they are playing hardball they will cash them both, however she then puts in a complaint with customer services.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

This does not tally with a request for a "Pre-court settlement", so it seems to me that either something else happened on the day, over and above what she has told you, or the Rail Company is not following the agreed rules.

Whether or not "something else happened on the day" or not (which you are probably not going to learn about until/if the matter proceeds to Court where the rules of 'disclosure' will assist you, or whether or not the Company acted in accordance with published policy, I have to advice you that the strict condition of travelling on a discounted ticket without the evidence of eligibility for that discount has to be treated as breach of the contractural regulations.

As for offering to send a scan of a railcard after the event, you probably don't need any help in seeing the massive potential for organised abuse if it was permitted to allow a discounted ticket if the qualifying evidence was only ever produced retrospectively and on demand. I estimate that the rail industry would loose a few hundreds of thousands every year. (and if the practice was officially accepted, then the weakness would probably become a target for fraudsters very very quickly, whether as individuals or as organised groups.

 

[AlterEgo]

As for offering to send a scan of a railcard after the event, you probably don't need any help in seeing the massive potential for organised abuse if it was permitted to allow a discounted ticket if the qualifying evidence was only ever produced retrospectively and on demand. I estimate that the rail industry would loose a few hundreds of thousands every year. (and if the practice was officially accepted, then the weakness would probably become a target for fraudsters very very quickly, whether as individuals or as organised groups.

But this is official policy now. http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2017/469772179-2017-03-21.html

 

[island]

And for the sake of completeness, the Railcard, which the passenger chose to sign under the words "I accept the conditions of use", states "to be carried on all rail journeys". A photograph of the Railcard does not legally suffice.

 

[cuccir]

This is a difficult one because she should have been offered the opportunity to pay for a new ticket. The following is also written in presumption that your trust in your daughter's honesty is well placed!

The new railcard policy doesn't change the law; legally, the train company still have a right to prosecute someone who doesn't have the railcard and (therefore) the right to demand an out of court settlement in lieu of prosecution. They've just said that they generally won't.

So while I have sympathy with those saying 'challenge it', it is worth pointing out that the quickest and easiest way to stop this is to send them a cheque for £84.25 and chalk it up to experience. You never have to think about it again, and could be done with this whole thing in around 15 minutes. If this is a sum which is affordable to you, then there is some merit in doing that.

I wonder if in the first instance whether this is a case where a phone call might be most appropriate: ideally to the prosecutions department, but failing that to customer services. Given that policy apparently hasn't been followed, there will be someone in the organisation who has the authority and inclination to stop this; the question is finding them! We don't usually advise calling customer services but given the customer-facing policy that has apparently not been followed, this case may differ. (Edit - an email directly to gwrprosecutions may work too: if you email and don't hear back in a week, there's still time to send the cheque!).

Additionally, a well worded, conciliatory letter along with any cheque sent which asks why the policy wasn't followed would not be a bad idea. If the cheque is cashed, it is also worth considering following this up with customer services with a view to getting that money back. Finally - absolute worst case of prosecution would be a 'Byelaw' prosecution only, which is not recordable on criminal record checks. So the worst outcome if you do chose to try and challenge this is only a fine that would be higher than the out of court settlement offered, but probably no more than £100-£200 higher.

 

[najaB]

But this is official policy now. http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2017/469772179-2017-03-21.html

Have I missed where that policy says 'you can travel with your discounted ticket if you show us a photo of your railcard'?

 

[SA_900]

My daughter was stopped by a revenue protection inspectors at Reading Railway Station on 10th June 2017.

At the time she had purchased a discounted ticket, from Wokingham to Reading wrongly believing she had her railcard with her

Upon being stopped sherealised she had left her valid railcard at her boyfriends address in Reading. She texted her boyfriend who texted back a photograph of the railcard and also stated he would attend the station with it straight away. (He lives in the town centre so this would have taken 10 mins at most). For some reason this was not acceptable to the Revenue Protection Inspector.

She has have now received a “Pre-Court Settlement Offer which is only available till 7 July 2017.

She must pay £84.25 which is £4.25 for the full price ticket and £80 “Admin Fee”. If not paid by 7 July it will be doubled and court proceedings started.
She still has the text message with the photo saved and it is dated and timed so there is no reason not to believe her version of events.

What can she do. This seems way OTT for a genuine mistake.

Thanks in advance

Completely unacceptable. Shouldn't actually need to pay even the £4.25. There is time though so write to them and highlight their failure to follow this guidance and ask how the railcard should be produced http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2017/469772179-2017-03-21.html

 

[causton]

Have I missed where that policy says 'you can travel with your discounted ticket if you show us a photo of your railcard'?

You can travel with a drawing of it in biro if you like! - you get one chance only (a year) if you make a mistake - as quoted:

From now on, Railcard holders who make a mistake will have one chance a year to be refunded if they provide proof of the Railcard as set out by the operator they travelled with.

 

[AlterEgo]

Have I missed where that policy says 'you can travel with your discounted ticket if you show us a photo of your railcard'?

No - my post was in response to Dave who said that there was an obvious potential for abuse if people could:

send a scan of a railcard after the event, you probably don't need any help in seeing the massive potential for organised abuse if it was permitted to allow a discounted ticket if the qualifying evidence was only ever produced retrospectively and on demand.

I pointed out that this is actually policy now. See: http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2017/469772179-2017-03-21.html

A rule change by all train companies means that someone asked to pay extra for failing to show a required Railcard will be guaranteed a refund on at least the first occasion in any year, provided they can produce the Railcard later.

I didn't suggest that someone could avoid a demand for additional fare due at the time by showing a photo.

 

[najaB]

You can travel with a drawing of it in biro if you like! - you get one chance only (a year) if you make a mistake...

Yes, at least one opportunity to get a refund on the new ticket which you buy, not to travel on the discounted ticket by promising to send a picture afterwards.

 

[najaB]

I didn't suggest that someone could avoid a demand for additional fare due at the time by showing a photo.

Neither did DaveNewcastle - in the part of the post you quoted he said "if it was permitted to allow a discounted ticket if the qualifying evidence was only ever produced retrospectively and on demand"

 

[sheff1]

I have to advice you that the strict condition of travelling on a discounted ticket without the evidence of eligibility for that discount has to be treated as breach of the contractural regulations.

As for offering to send a scan of a railcard after the event, you probably don't need any help in seeing the massive potential for organised abuse if it was permitted to allow a discounted ticket if the qualifying evidence was only ever produced retrospectively and on demand. I estimate that the rail industry would loose a few hundreds of thousands every year. (and if the practice was officially accepted, then the weakness would probably become a target for fraudsters very very quickly, whether as individuals or as organised groups.

Did you not read the link where the following statement is made by RDG:
A rule change by all train companies means that someone asked to pay extra for failing to show a required Railcard will be guaranteed a refund on at least the first occasion in any year, provided they can produce the Railcard later. The key word there is "guaranteed". That stated guarantee must surely form part of the contract.

The link then goes on to state
From now on, Railcard holders who make a mistake will have one chance a year to be refunded if they provide proof of the Railcard as set out by the operator they travelled with.
Your estimate of "loss" by the rail industry if a completely different policy was in place is irrelevant.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Yes, at least one opportunity to get a refund on the new ticket which you buy, not to travel on the discounted ticket by promising to send a picture afterwards.

The OP's daughter was not allowed to buy a new ticket. She offered to buy a new ticket. This was refused and she was written up for prosecution. I don't understand why, surely a Penalty Fare would have been more appropriate, but we do know from media coverage that GWR revenue inspectors are disciplined if they don't write up enough people.

I believe that the RDG are disingenuous charlatans at the best of times, but even I cannot believe that their intended policy is to publicly offer one get-out-of-jail card only to undermine it by prosecuting people instead.

I can't believe the policy is "we'll give you a refund on a new ticket, but we won't sell you one of those, we'll issue an MG11 and charge you £80 instead". So why are GWR ignoring what their own trade body has put in place?

The OP's daughter needs to show that she has the railcard (and no, a photograph is not sufficient) and send this to GWR as a matter of urgency, along with a copy of the RDG guidance. She may also wish to contact London Travelwatch about this.

 

[Mottsy]

Thanks to all for you help and advice.

My daughter emailed the Prosecutions Department GWR last night and has already received a reply. (A very quick and impressive response time).

In their words, "I can confirm that we are able to withdraw this case – you may rest assured that we now consider the matter closed."

They even attached a hard copy of a letter they are sending confirming this.

Thanks again for all your help

Mottsy

 

[Mottsy]

Oh and just for the record,

My daughter has not been asked to produce the actual railcard.

All that was sent by email was a copy of the text from her boyfriend on the night showing the photo and the card and him stating he was on his way and would be there in less than 10 minutes. This was available to the Revenue Inspector on the night.

It would seem the prosecutions department actually have common sense and have used it.

Those jobsworths defending the Revenue Inspector saying she was following the rules: She was not. No receipt was issued to my daughter when her discounted ticket was seized as is required under Section 20 of NATIONAL RAIL CONDITIONS OF CARRIAGE:

There is an old saying. The rule book is there for the guidance of wise men and the abeyance of fools.

All this Inspector has caused is upset, bad feeling, resentment and more work for GWR dealing with emails writing letters etc.

All this caused because a young girl made a genuine mistake for the first time and was basically treated as a criminal as a result.

 

[AlterEgo]

The OP's daughter was not allowed to buy a new ticket. She offered to buy a new ticket. This was refused and she was written up for prosecution. I don't understand why, surely a Penalty Fare would have been more appropriate, but we do know from media coverage that GWR revenue inspectors are disciplined if they don't write up enough people.

Yes, it is this aspect which caused concern with me - the apparent refusal of the sale of a new ticket in apparent contradiction of the new RDG policy.

 

[najaB]

The OP's daughter was not allowed to buy a new ticket. She offered to buy a new ticket. This was refused and she was written up for prosecution. I don't understand why...

Nobody does. As I suggested up-thread the OP needs to get GWR to explain why not.

The point I was making is that the criticism of DaveNewcastle's post was unfounded as he didn't say anything that contradicted that policy.

 

[MikeWh]

The matter has been resolved - see posts 22 and 23.

And the OP shouldn't have to wait for post approval anymore now they have 6 posts.

 

[gray1404]

If there still the option for the OP's daughter to take this up with London Travelwatch. I understand London Travelwatch are much better then Transport Focus. The reason I ask this is because clearly GWR are not adhering to to RDG policy and they have offered (unless we could please see a copy of the letter they have sent/emailed over with personal information edited out) no reassurances that they will address and correct the behavior of their RPI's who are not acting inline with the correct policy.

 

[Tetchytyke]

If there still the option for the OP's daughter to take this up with London Travelwatch.

I wouldn't bother. The correct policy would have been to charge her a Penalty Fare and then try and get it refunded later. At least this way round she didn't have to hand over any cash.

Given that GWR (allegedly) discipline RPIs who don't issue enough MG11s, I'd not waste the breath.

It's a good result for the OP's daughter, I'm glad they saw sense.

 

[AlterEgo]

Glad to hear this has been resolved satisfactorily, notwithstanding some of the academic arguments in this thread.

 

[najaB]

I wouldn't bother. The correct policy would have been to charge her a Penalty Fare...

Wouldn't it actually have been an undiscounted ticket rather than Penalty Fare?