STD class ticket in First class carriage - barely sat down

[Sally]

Hi all,

I appreciate this topic has been discussed before and I’ve found reading the replies really helpful. My case is slightly different circumstantially in that I only sat down in a first class seat for a couple of seconds without a valid first class ticket and so I wondered if this held any weight..?

• I boarded the 9.33am train from St Albans on a weekday and my end destination was London St Pancras.
• I had a super off peak return, standard class ticket.
• I boarded the train with my mother. A “passenger host” (inspector) asked myself and my mother for our tickets (approx 2-3 minutes after the train left our station). My mother had a valid first class ticket and I asked if I could sit with her so we could travel together. Moments before he had asked to see our tickets, I sat down for about 2 seconds which the inspector observed (& later agreed he only saw me sitting for this short time). We would’ve have approached him before he asked to see our tickets to check if I could sit with my mum, but he was checking the tickets of other passengers.
• I declined to pay the penalty fare as I felt it was unfair given my honest intentions, because I had immediately suggested we would both move to a std class carriage, and due to the brief amount of time I were in the wrong area of the train. I chose the MG11 option and so I’m awaiting to hear from them.

I wondered what your thoughts about this are and on my chances of appealing? I understand that when applied rigidly, I was indeed in the wrong carriage, and did sit in a first class seat without the right ticket. But is it reasonable to charge a penalty fare for this unintentional error, especially given that it was only for 2 seconds..? Is it worth appealing to their good nature or am I fighting a losing battle and should I just cough up?

Any thoughts or advice greatly appreciated.

 

[Failed Unit]

How clear was it that it was a first class coach?

They declassify the rear, they declassify entire trains.

Could you argue it was unclear? I did with GTR on the 387s. The have since improved the labelling. But from St Albans the same train heading to Sutton doesn’t have first. Is it easy for an infrequent traveller to tell if it does / doesn’t have first in use.

 

[najaB]

I declined to pay the penalty fare as I felt it was unfair given my honest intentions, because I had immediately suggested we would both move to a std class carriage, and due to the brief amount of time I were in the wrong area of the train. I chose the MG11 option and so I’m awaiting to hear from them.

This was a mistake - you should have paid the penalty fare and then challenged it. The problem is that the relevant legislation (Byelaw 19) doesn't make any provision for the length of time that you are in the wrong class of accommodation. You sat in a First Class seat when you didn't have a First Class ticket - that's a clear breach of strict liability legislation.

 

[Sally]

Thanks for your comments Failed Unit.

I believe 1st class at rear of the train was declassified but we boarded a 1st class carriage at the front which the inspector said was not declassified. I’m not sure we can argue it was unclear as we acknowledged it was first class and that I didn’t have the right ticket, and we were proactively asking him if I was allowed to sit there as my mum was travelling first.

We were on the Bedford to three bridges train, but boarded at St Albans.

 

[Sally]

This was a mistake - you should have paid the penalty fare and then challenged it. The problem is that the relevant legislation (Byelaw 19) doesn't make any provision for the length of time that you are in the wrong class of accommodation. You sat in a First Class seat when you didn't have a First Class ticket - that's a clear breach of strict liability legislation.

Thanks najab. I guess my fear was if I paid the penalty fare, my chances of recovering the money was very unlikely and I stood a better chance of not losing money if I contested the penalty fare. I don’t think I fully understand exactly what a MG11 is and it’s implications - have I made things worse?

 

[najaB]

I don’t think I fully understand exactly what a MG11 is and it’s implications - have I made things worse?

Possibly, yes. The thing is that a Penalty Fare, once paid, effectively settles the matter. It's entirely possible that they will agree to settle the matter without going to court but it's likely to cost more than the Penalty Fare would have.

 

[Hadders]

Welcome to the forum. I'm sorry to hear about your situation. Unfortunately the best course of action would've been to pay the Penalty Fare, however unpaletable or unfair it appeared at the time.

The train company will write to you asking for your version of events. Send them a polite, concise reply (there are several examples elsewhere on the forum). Hopefully the train company will offer an administrative settlement to prevent the matter from proceeding to court but this is likely to cost far more than the Penalty Fare would've cost on the day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW, if one person has a First Class ticket and the other a Standard ticket, the correct thing to do is to sit (or stand) in Standard together. First Class tickets are valid in Standard.

 

[bb21]

Thanks for your comments Failed Unit.

I believe 1st class at rear of the train was declassified but we boarded a 1st class carriage at the front which the inspector said was not declassified. I’m not sure we can argue it was unclear as we acknowledged it was first class and that I didn’t have the right ticket, and we were proactively asking him if I was allowed to sit there as my mum was travelling first.

We were on the Bedford to three bridges train, but boarded at St Albans.

Your difficulty, if I understood you correctly, is getting them to believe that you would otherwise have either moved to Standard Class or paid for an upgrade if he hadn't approached you, given that he approached you first and you were sat down (albeit only for a few seconds) rather than going straight up to him, despite noticing him dealing with another customer.

Other factors may or may not play to your favour, eg. if you only purchased the ticket before boarding, then questions may well be asked as to whether you did have any intention to pay the difference in fare as you would have known your mother had a First Class ticket, in theory, but I can't really comment further without knowing the exact circumstances surrounding your case.

 

[Sally]

Thanks for your comments Hadders and najaB - kicking myself now

Bb21 your reflections are very helpful. The order of events were as follows:

My mum and I boarded the train at St Albans and went into a first class carriage.
In autopilot, I sat down for a couple of seconds and then sprung up remembering we still needed to double check if it was ok for me to be in that carriage.
My mum was standing and remained standing for the duration, politely waiting to speak to the inspector once he finished checking the tickets of another 1-2 passengers sat a couple seats before where we were situated. If he wasn’t otherwised occupied, we had every intention to approach him, my mum was still standing, waiting, as was apart from that very brief moment...

I did not intend to pay for an upgrade (only bought the tickets before boarding) but fully intended to move carriage if requested to do so.

Does this help explain the circumstances a bit more? Please let me know if further information would be helpful, I’m very grateful for your thoughts.

 

[najaB]

I did not intend to pay for an upgrade (only bought the tickets before boarding) but fully intended to move carriage if requested to do so.

That is unfortunate. It really would have helped your case if you had bought your ticket in advance and then later realised the need to upgrade. While I don't have any reason to doubt your story, from the TOC's (train operating company) point of view it could easily be seen as an attempt to sneak a First Class journey and only pay if you were challenged.

As @Hadders correctly says, all you can do at this point is wait for a letter and explain fully if given the chance.

 

[Sally]

Ah ok, I will do my best to put my story across and appeal their good nature as it seems legally, there’s no wiggle room. I’ll also get saving!

Thanks for your advice.

 

[Haywain]

As Thameslink trains do not have on-board staff normally, the very fact of boarding in that area and taking a seat would suggest an intention to travel in that area without paying anything extra.

 

[yorkie]

• I declined to pay the penalty fare as I felt it was unfair given my honest intentions,....

A Penalty Fare is a higher than normal fare which the company is allowed to charge for circumstances such as the one described. The issuing of such a fare is not actually an accusation of dishonesty.

However based on what you have said, there is probably sufficient evidence to secure a criminal conviction for deliberate fare evasion.

As you refused the penalty fare, you will probably be taken to court. You'll need to ensure you are represented by a solicitor if you are to have any chance of avoiding a conviction, but based on what you've said here, I don't think you have much of a case.

If it's not too late to do so, and if both parties can agree on an amount, an out of court settlement may be a good outcome for you.

 

[bb21]

Ah ok, I will do my best to put my story across and appeal their good nature as it seems legally, there’s no wiggle room. I’ll also get saving!

Thanks for your advice.

I don't think it is a complete lost cause. Sometimes it is an entirely reasonable thing for people to do eg. to accompany a frail elderly passenger onboard, or expect to be able to upgrade onboard, notwithstanding notices, etc.

Like you say, just put your honest story across to them. If you made an error of judgement in waiting for him to come around, and/or forgot that your mum had a First Class ticket when purchasing your ticket, and/or didn't realise that the refusal of a Penalty Fare would lead to likely prosecution, say so. If you don't think the RPI explained the implications of an MG11 thoroughly to you, then say so too. It would then explain to the case-handler why everything panned out this way.

If you were dealing with Thameslink directly rather than through a debt collection agency, they would be able to exercise discretion more freely, so a better chance of the matter being dealt with on a more favourable slant. No guarantees but worth a try, and certainly not the end of the world for a first offence.

 

[Sally]

A Penalty Fare is a higher than normal fare which the company is allowed to charge for circumstances such as the one described. The issuing of such a fare is not actually an accusation of dishonesty.

However based on what you have said, there is probably sufficient evidence to secure a criminal conviction for deliberate fare evasion.

As you refused the penalty fare, you will probably be taken to court. You'll need to ensure you are represented by a solicitor if you are to have any chance of avoiding a conviction, but based on what you've said here, I don't think you have much of a case.

If it's not too late to do so, and if both parties can agree on an amount, an out of court settlement may be a good outcome for you.

Ha ha ha ha!!
I might not know exactly what a MG11 is but I know what you’ve written above is TOTAL nonsense and ill-informed. I feel sorry for those people that come on here for advice and receive comments like the above, and who might not have support networks like I do - you’re scaremongering and inaccurate. Yes, I will probably have to pay more than the penalty fare but I certainly won’t be summoned to court!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ha ha ha ha!!
I might not know exactly what a MG11 is but I know what you’ve written above is TOTAL nonsense and ill-informed. I feel sorry for those people that come on here for advice and receive comments like the above, and who might not have support networks like I do - you’re scaremongering and inaccurate. Yes, I will probably have to pay more than the penalty fare but I certainly won’t be summoned to court!

Rubbish. There is a very high chance you could be summoned to Court as you have, according to what you have posted, committed a criminal offence (at the very least a Byelaw offence which is strict liability - you committed it the second you entered First Class with the intention of remaining there for any period of time longer than necessary to pass through it on trains where it is necessary to do so to reach other parts of Standard). TOCs like easy, clear-cut cases because they can have some convictions "pour encourager les autres".

Yorkie knows what he is talking about.

If you want to ask permission to do something your ticket does not permit, you must always ask that permission before doing the thing you wish to do, and are very well advised to request that permission to be given in writing. Otherwise you risk what happened here.

You also made a very bad mistake in not accepting the Penalty Fare, which you could then have appealed.

 

[Sally]

I don't think it is a complete lost cause. Sometimes it is an entirely reasonable thing for people to do eg. to accompany a frail elderly passenger onboard, or expect to be able to upgrade onboard, notwithstanding notices, etc.

Like you say, just put your honest story across to them. If you made an error of judgement in waiting for him to come around, and/or forgot that your mum had a First Class ticket when purchasing your ticket, and/or didn't realise that the refusal of a Penalty Fare would lead to likely prosecution, say so. If you don't think the RPI explained the implications of an MG11 thoroughly to you, then say so too. It would then explain to the case-handler why everything panned out this way.

If you were dealing with Thameslink directly rather than through a debt collection agency, they would be able to exercise discretion more freely, so a better chance of the matter being dealt with on a more favourable slant. No guarantees but worth a try, and certainly not the end of the world for a first offence.

Thanks so much bb21. Your advice is super helpful

 

[Sally]

Ha ha ha ha!!
I might not know exactly what a MG11 is but I know what you’ve written above is TOTAL nonsense and ill-informed. I feel sorry for those people that come on here for advice and receive comments like the above, and who might not have support networks like I do - you’re scaremongering and inaccurate. Yes, I will probably have to pay more than the penalty fare but I certainly won’t be summoned to court!

Rubbish. There is a very high chance you could be summoned to Court as you have, according to what you have posted, committed a criminal offence. TOCs like easy, clear-cut cases because they can have some convictions "pour encourager les autres".

Yorkie knows what he is talking about.

Oh dear. I find this all really quite sad, and I’m somewhat embarrassed for you. I have not committed a criminal offence i suggest you look up the difference between civil and criminal offences and stop offering the wrong advice to people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh dear. I find this all really quite sad, and I’m somewhat embarrassed for you. I have not committed a criminal offence i suggest you look up the difference between civil and criminal offences and stop offering the wrong advice to people.

Because, taking your posts at face value, you intended to remain in First Class without paying the correct fare, you have most probably committed an offence within the Regulation of Railways Act. That most definitely is a criminal offence and would, unless filtered due to being a sole offence and related criteria, appear on a DBS check. It's harder to prosecute than a Byelaw offence, because it requires intent, but your postings make it clear that you did have that intent so I would expect such a prosecution to succeed.

Based on your postings, a Byelaw conviction absolutely would succeed, as the fact that you were caught in First Class without a First Class ticket having passed the opportunity to purchase one before boarding by definition makes you guilty of this. It is a strict liability offence, which means intent does not matter, the simple fact that you were caught there without the correct ticket is adequate evidence to prosecute.

If you are going to take such an arrogant approach to people who are helping you, and you do not take this with the seriousness it requires, it is likely you will find yourself in Court and with a criminal record.

Do not underestimate how serious this is. This is not a parking ticket; there are far stronger laws backing it up than that.

 

[Sally]

1. You are accusing me of making a criminal offence.

2. You are suggesting it is likely I will go to court.

Both of these are inaccurate and for others on here looking for well informed advice, quite unhelpful.

I am not being arrogant, I’m sorry you’re experience me as that. I am simply contesting your opinion and by doing so, I am not likely to find myself with a criminal record (as you once again, inaccurately suggest).

And for the record; I do and I am taking it seriously. That’s why I posted on this forum. I just object to people exaggerating the potential outcomes. It creates unnecessary and unhelpful anxiety in people.

 

[telstarbox]

Why are you wasting our time asking for advice if you clearly know better?

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. You are accusing me of making a criminal offence.

Your posts strongly suggest that you have committed one.

Is it or is it not true that you entered and remained in First Class without a First Class ticket?

If so, that alone is adequate to commit a Byelaw offence.

Is it or is it not true that you intended to remain in First Class without a First Class ticket? (Whether you intended to ask permission once caught is irrelevant; such permission must be sought in advance of entering First Class). It doesn't matter how long for, "until caught" is long enough.

If so, that alone is adequate to commit a Regulation of Railways Act offence. This is a criminal offence and carries a criminal record.

2. You are suggesting it is likely I will go to court.

It is likely. You should proceed with the view that this is to be avoided and attempt to settle out of court with the TOC. They may accept your explanation, but they may well not do. You may have to make them a substantial financial offer to keep it out of Court, or they may make you one which if they do you should pay. They may or may not accept an offer like this and may choose to prosecute. If they do, your postings suggest to me that they will succeed.

Rejecting the Penalty Fare, the issue of which was the correct way to deal with this situation, was very ill-advised.

Both of these are inaccurate and for others on here looking for well informed advice, quite unhelpful.

Incorrect.

I am not being arrogant, I’m sorry you’re experience me as that. I am simply contesting your opinion and by doing so, I am not likely to find myself with a criminal record (as you once again, I accurately suggest).

You are welcome to contest the opinion of anyone you like, but do not hide your head in the sand and ensure you engage properly per the advice of others in order to avoid a conviction. I strongly back Yorkie in suggesting that if it does go to Court you engage a professional solicitor with experience in such matters to defend you.

 

[Sally]

1. You are accusing me of making a criminal offence.

2. You are suggesting it is likely I will go to court.

Both of these are inaccurate and for others on here looking for well informed advice, quite unhelpful.

I am not being arrogant, I’m sorry you’re experience me as that. I am simply contesting your opinion and by doing so, I am not likely to find myself with a criminal record (as you once again, inaccurately suggest).

Why are you wasting our time asking for advice if you clearly know better?

I very much welcome advice and I’m thankful for all the opinions, even the ones I am challenging. I just find the comments by Yorkie and bletchleyite scaremongering and exaggerated, and so I’m saying so. I’m not trying to waste peoples’ time, and nor do I think “I know better” but I’m trying to have a helpful discussion.

 

[najaB]

I might not know exactly what a MG11 is but I know what you’ve written above is TOTAL nonsense and ill-informed.

It is not.

 

[najaB]

I have not committed a criminal offence

You have. As I pointed out earlier you have contravened Railway Byelaw 19.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Hi,

You hadn't paid the correct fare and it could be argued by siiting in first without a correct ticket you intended to avoid payment.

So is it likely to go to court on your first time getting caught? No but are they scare mongering ? No, they are just telling you worst case scenario.

Prison is an option, even if not for the reason I have quoted below there are many other parts of the act with similar outcomes.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5

3)If any person—
(a)Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or
(b)Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or
(c)Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,
he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding [F6level 2 on the standard scale][F2[F7level 3 on the standard scale]], or, in the case of a second or subsequent offence, either to a fine not exceeding [F6level 2 on the standard scale][F2[F7level 3 on the standard scale]], or in the discretion of the court to imprisonment for a term not exceeding [F8three months].

 

[Tetchytyke]

1. You are accusing me of making a criminal offence.

You have committed a criminal offence. Railway Byelaw 19:

Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in any seat, berth or any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is reserved for a specified ticket holder or holders of tickets of a specific class, except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place.

And that's before we consider whether you intended to avoid payment of the fare.

2. You are suggesting it is likely I will go to court.

That depends on what you do. Do nothing and, yes, you will be taken to the Magistrates' Court and prosecuted.

Offer GTR something to make it go away, and it probably will go away. But GTR don't have to accept any offer you make, financial or mitigation, and could prosecute. They have the backing of the criminal law, not civil.

I am not likely to find myself with a criminal record (as you once again, inaccurately suggest).

If you are prosecuted and convicted under the Byelaws then no, you won't get a criminal record.

If you are prosecuted and convicted under the Regulation of Railways Act then yes, you would.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There is good pragmatic advice on a possible outcome from bb21, and I'm glad that you agree . . . . .

Thanks so much bb21. Your advice is super helpful

However, it really will be a help to you to be aware of the context, which is that railway ticketing matters such as this ARE the subject of Criminal Law, and there are a few thousand of cases brought forward to the Magistrates every year, though a large proportion of these are prosecutions against passengers who have failed to engage with the Company in the way that bb21 suggests, and who just hide from the matter.

Oh dear. I find this all really quite sad, and I’m somewhat embarrassed for you. I have not committed a criminal offence i suggest you look up the difference between civil and criminal offences and stop offering the wrong advice to people.

I'm sorry to have to advise you that the Company does have the backing of Criminal Law, and regularly does bring Private Prosecutions for matters such as travel in First Class with a standard class ticket (and not a Civil action) :-

Railway Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 S.103 "“without having previously paid his fare”. ‘His fare’ in this section means the fare by the train and for the class of carriage in which the passenger travels." The leading authority used to secure a conviction is Gillingham v Walker (1881) 45 JP 470 ; 44 LT 715 ; 29 WR 896. Convicted.
Railway Byelaws 2005 Byelaw 19 "Classes of accommodation, reserved seats and sleeping berths
Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in any seat, berth or any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is reserved for a specified ticket holder or holders of tickets of a specific class, except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place."
Regulation of Railways Act 1889 S.5(1) ")Every passenger by a railway shall, on request by an officer or servant of a railway company, either produce, and if so requested deliver up, a ticket showing that his fare is paid, or pay his fare from the place whence he started" where 'his fare' is the appropriate fare for the class of travel. An authority id Noble v Killick (1891) 60 LJMC 61 DC where Killinck had a standard ticket and the court held 'that the passenger had not previously paid his fare'. Convicted.
Killick had travelled in second class with a third class ticket
​

All three of these are summonsed to be heard in Magistrates Courts, though the Byelaw conviction does not appear on a subsequent DBS check.
I am not 'scaremongering' but just trying to inform you of the background when you write back to the Company so that you are fully informed of the options open to them should you find that your mitigation isn't accepted.
On the other hand, a civil action against you is just not going to happen for a one-off incident like this.

Sorry that this isn't what you wanted to learn.

 

[Sally]

Thanks all for advice, the links to the docs are very informative.

I absolutely have no intention of ignoring any notices and will respond as already indicated by my previous post, with a conscise and honest letter.

I do think probability is an important concept to hold onto in this case, and I think worst case scenarios can be misleading and create proportionally more anxiety than necessary. But I suppose it does help to have a full picture of all options as provided by the forum.