Prosecution from Southern trains

[ForTheLoveOf]

My company card has since been replaced (lost on a team night out ) which would be an issue for doing that as I don't have that card number to register.

I am however going to call them up and see if they can provide me a contactless log from the previous card.

If this doesn't work, try contacting the card issuer to get the details of the old card (explaining the circumstances). It probably won't give rise to much but it's all worth a try.

 

[30907]

Apologies if i'm being a bit thick here - but is my situation (as described previously) any different from others who have been pulled up on travelling without the right ticket? Are the other elements also being taken into account by the prosecutor? I'm understanding that it is only the 1 thing I am being charged for?

If I have read the early posts correctly,
1) you declined to pay a Penalty Fare at Epsom (the reason doesn't now matter)
2) you are now therefore being charged under the Byelaws with not having a valid ticket for your journey. This sequence of events is not AFAIK unusual.
3) nothing else is being alleged.

For completeness' sake, some forum members have suggested you might have a defence against (2).

 

[ConcernedTok]

If I have read the early posts correctly,
1) you declined to pay a Penalty Fare at Epsom (the reason doesn't now matter)
2) you are now therefore being charged under the Byelaws with not having a valid ticket for your journey. This sequence of events is not AFAIK unusual.
3) nothing else is being alleged.

For completeness' sake, some forum members have suggested you might have a defence against (2).

This is how I'm understanding it, yes.

 

[some bloke]

I expect @ForTheLoveOf will explain, but in case it's useful for the moment, as I understand it the basic point is that the company is going for an offence you didn't commit - since you did enter the train with a "ticket" valid to travel on that service. Your contactless card, validated at the start of the journey, was valid when you "entered" the train; it was valid to some stations, but not as far as Epsom. This is from a subsequent part of the discussion:

the Byelaw is concerned with those who fail to make use of available ticketing facilities to buy any ticket at all.

 

[furlong]

Nope, never done that. There is a Tfl charge on the credit card for the same day however.

What was the amount of that charge and did it include other journeys you made that day (if so, try to work out what they were)?

 

[ConcernedTok]

What was the amount of that charge and did it include other journeys you made that day (if so, try to work out what they were)?

The amount was £4.40 which would have been from my hotel in Paddington (if I remember correctly) to Victoria and then the return journey. I don't think this has included my tapping in at Victoria to get the Epsom train.

 

[furlong]

2) you are now therefore being charged under the Byelaws with not having a valid ticket for your journey. This sequence of events is not AFAIK unusual.

The very wording quoted "at Epsom Entered" hints at the possible conundrum.

 

[some bloke]

The amount was £4.40 which would have been from my hotel in Paddington (if I remember correctly) to Victoria and then the return journey. I don't think this has included my tapping in at Victoria to get the Epsom train.

In that case, as Furlong says, you could try to work out (exactly) what journeys you were charged for - where did you tap in for the return?

Current fares are here:
https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/find-fares/tube-and-rail-fares/single-fare-finder

 

[ConcernedTok]

In that case, as Furlong says, you could try to work out (exactly) what journeys you were charged for - where did you tap in for the return?

Current fares are here:
https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/find-fares/tube-and-rail-fares/single-fare-finder

Looking back at my calendar, I was staying near Marlybone station. It seems the most likely route I would have taken is from Bond Street to London Victoria (and the opposite on return). This would account for the £4.80 card charge (not £4.40 as i said before) in the expenses spreadsheet.

I have called the bank this morning and they confirm that they can only see the £4.80 charge, as well as the ticket I bought from the Southern ticket machine for my return journey. They see nothing for my going through the barriers at Victoria to board the Epsom train. They said that they can only see journeys that were charged for, which makes sense since I never got a chance to tap out at the other end, there was nothing to charge for?

 

[paddington]

They said that they can only see journeys that were charged for, which makes sense since I never got a chance to tap out at the other end, there was nothing to charge for?

Normally if you touch in and don't touch out, you are charged a maximum fare in addition to any other travel.

This could have been charged the next day, or not charged at all due to automatic journey completion or refunding depending on your travel patterns on that card.

 

[ConcernedTok]

Normally if you touch in and don't touch out, you are charged a maximum fare in addition to any other travel.

This could have been charged the next day, or not charged at all due to automatic journey completion or refunding depending on your travel patterns on that card.

There weren't any charges for the next day. Can only assume its not been charged at all as I went back through Victoria. Although I did expect something to be charged if I'm being honest, especially when you mention maximum fare.

 

[some bloke]

Can only assume its not been charged at all as I went back through Victoria.

There are maximum journey times: going to Epsom and back then using the tube would usually be too long for a zone 1 journey using the original touch in, even if the reader/barrier situation allowed it.

https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/how-to-pay...y-as-you-go/keep-within-maximum-journey-times

 

[ConcernedTok]

There are maximum journey times: going to Epsom and back then using the tube would usually be too long for a zone 1 journey using the original touch in, even if the reader/barrier situation allowed it.

https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/how-to-pay...y-as-you-go/keep-within-maximum-journey-times

I've double checked - there has certainly not been anything charged. Are they likely to try and say that I'd jumped the barriers or something then???

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I've double checked - there has certainly not been anything charged. Are they likely to try and say that I'd jumped the barriers or something then???

They don't have access to the TfL data as far as I'm aware. I would be highly surprised if they attempted to claim you had managed to get through the Victoria barriers without a ticket. They would be admitting their own incompetence!

 

[jumble]

The very wording quoted "at Epsom Entered" hints at the possible conundrum.

Hmm
My understanding is that the statement is in an intended prosecution letter
We cannot be at all sure this error will not be corrected if a summons arrives
Thus there is not much of a conundrum at this stage
Jumble

 

[jumble]

They don't have access to the TfL data as far as I'm aware. I would be highly surprised if they attempted to claim you had managed to get through the Victoria barriers without a ticket. They would be admitting their own incompetence!

If I were a TOC agreeing to take oyster I would absolutly want and expect to see what people have actually paid
The Oyster terms and conditions state
In certain circumstances, TfL, relevant TOCs and river service operators may also share your personal information with the police and other law enforcement agencies for the purposes of the prevention or detection of crime.
I Imagine that TOCs could not share oyster info if they did not have access to it in the first place
However an FOI would be needed to prove either way

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

If I were a TOC agreeing to take oyster I would absolutly want and expect to see what people have actually paid
The Oyster terms and conditions state
In certain circumstances, TfL, relevant TOCs and river service operators may also share your personal information with the police and other law enforcement agencies for the purposes of the prevention or detection of crime.
I Imagine that TOCs could not share oyster info if they did not have access to it in the first place
However an FOI would be needed to prove either way

I think the more fundamental issue is that I don't expect they will have the card number, or anything else from the OP, in order to look at the data. A touch-in at Victoria without any other touch-out is going to be sufficiently common that I don't imagine they'd be able to identify the OP just from that.

 

[jumble]

I think the more fundamental issue is that I don't expect they will have the card number, or anything else from the OP, in order to look at the data. A touch-in at Victoria without any other touch-out is going to be sufficiently common that I don't imagine they'd be able to identify the OP just from that.

Maybe
I am happy to say that I have never been stopped and so have no idea if the RPI would log the Credit card number ( or Oyster card) used or not as part of their evidence.
If they do not then you are more than likely correct

 

[swt_passenger]

Surely if the OP wants to use a Contactless touch in at Victoria en route to Epsom in his defence, it is up to him to provide the evidence?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Surely if the OP wants to use a Contactless touch in at Victoria en route to Epsom in his defence, it is up to him to provide the evidence?

No. It is for the prosecution to provide evidence that the defendant is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. They are accusing the OP of having boarded the service without having a valid ticket. It is therefore for them (Southern) to show that this is the case. If, without being required to do so, the OP says "I had a validated contactless card" then they will certainly struggle to fight against that, especially in the context of a barriered station. It is more than adequate to provide the reasonable doubt required to find the OP 'not guilty'.

 

[some bloke]

Proof of touch-in might make it easier to avoid court. Perhaps the TfL log would shed light on why no max. fare was charged.

I am however going to call them up and see if they can provide me a contactless log from the previous card.

 

[30907]

Your contactless card, validated at the start of the journey, was valid when you "entered" the train; it was valid to some stations, but not as far as Epsom.

I am uneasy about this interpretation.
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/terms-...and-travel-conditions-of-carriage?intcmp=3774

2.3 When you touch your contactless payment card on a yellow card reader, or a portable card reader held by staff, you are giving authorisation for the cost of your journey, including any maximum fares or unpaid fares, to be charged to your card account.
2.6 You must touch your contactless payment card on a yellow card reader at the start and end of each journey by...National Rail

Merely touching in does not create a valid ticket, even for a jourrney within the Zones. Paying for the journey taken requires both touching in AND touching out, and the OP did not do this (because they couldn't).
I am therefore doubtful that they have a defence against a Byelaw 18.1 OR 18.2 prosecution, though I would be delighted to see evidence to the contrary.

 

[furlong]

Merely touching in does not create a valid ticket, even for a jourrney within the Zones.

Check the definition of 'ticket' in the byelaws:

“ticket” includes
...
(iii) an authority to travel on a train provided by an Operator subject to a condition that payment of the correct fare for the person using that authority on which it is used is made during or at the end of that journey or otherwise as provided by the terms applicable to its use,
...
(vii) any type of smart card, pre-pay, or other form of electronic ticket, and
(viii) any other ticket or document issued for the purpose of travel of any animal or article on the railway accepted by an Operator;

An 18(1) offence occurs at the time and place of entering the train - and at that point in time, I would think a touched-in contactless card is intended to meet definition (iii). (Even if there is no touch out, the conditions still provide for a charge of a maximum fare.) An alternative offence of over-travelling is "knowingly". (Perhaps the complexity involved in all this is another example that justifies the Penalty Fares system.)

 

[ConcernedTok]

Hi all

I spoke to a few lawyers, and a couple have advised writing the initial response myself and getting back in touch should the outcome not be positive.

I've updated the wording on my previous letter, and it would be great to get any last minute feedback from the board before I send it off tomorrow. I'm obviously very nervous about sending this off but apologies for asking for a review again.

Thanks

 

[island]

Unless the train the OP used had no stops within the London zones (and I don’t think any such trains exist), they had a valid ticket upon boarding the train and have not committed the offence charged.

 

[ConcernedTok]

Unless the train the OP used had no stops within the London zones (and I don’t think any such trains exist), they had a valid ticket upon boarding the train and have not committed the offence charged.

Hi Island

Epsom was the first stop beyond the zones at the time (apparently it isn't anymore and is included as a tap out station). The lawyers that I have spoken to didn't seem to linger on this point for too long. While I personally agree, I'm not sure whether it is worth pursuing that path due to not getting any positive feedback on it from the lawyers.

All of this, with the potential of a criminal conviction, for the sake of what works out to be 70p (if I had got off at the station before) seems crazy to me. If i was hopping the barriers or a serial case, i could understand.

 

[island]

To be clear, my post said that if your train made one stop within the zones before getting to Epsom, then you had a valid ticket upon boarding the train and a prosecution for not having one would be on the shakiest of ground.

 

[ConcernedTok]

To be clear, my post said that if your train made one stop within the zones before getting to Epsom, then you had a valid ticket upon boarding the train and a prosecution for not having one would be on the shakiest of ground.

Agreed. But on speaking to a couple of lawyers, they didn't seem to see this as something to go forward with. Potentially as this is only a request for my statement at this stage? Is my letter response, in the way that its written, likely to negate this as a defence if it is something that needs reviewed down the line if they decide to move forward with a case?

 

[30907]

Check the definition of 'ticket' in the byelaws:


An 18(1) offence occurs at the time and place of entering the train - and at that point in time, I would think a touched-in contactless card is intended to meet definition (iii). (Even if there is no touch out, the conditions still provide for a charge of a maximum fare.) An alternative offence of over-travelling is "knowingly". (Perhaps the complexity involved in all this is another example that justifies the Penalty Fares system.)

Thank you, I'd not thought to check that bit. So that covers the use of contactless. On reflection, though, that leaves the question of validity open, but perhaps that is covered by the maximum fare debit provision.
The OP is not being charged under 18.2 so I won't start a hare running.

 

[ConcernedTok]

It's been over 2weeks now and haven't heard anything back from Southern trains. Is it fair to assume that they have passed this on to the courts to prosecute and that will take time to get a date now??