Faulty TVMs (Northern)

[Factotum]

I understand that if a TVM, the only source of tickets, is faulty you are not in breach of the byelaws when boarding a train without a ticket.
But how do you convince the revenue protection staff that the TVM was faulty.?

The TVM at my local station seems subject to random faults. On Tuesday, for example, it would not let me select a railcard. A couple of weeks ago I could not select my intended destination station./

Fortunately the guards all seem quite friendly about this, one of them even saying "Yes, that TVM is a bit iffy". But one day I am going to get a penalty

 

[AngusH]

Possibly make a video on your mobile phone (assuming you have one)
?

Or hold up a sign in view of the CCTV?


Is there a proper procedure for this?

 

[trover]

Is it the passenger’s responsibility to prove that a ticket machine is out of order or the TOC’s to prove that it is functioning properly?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Is it the passenger’s responsibility to prove that a ticket machine is out of order or the TOC’s to prove that it is functioning properly?

Never the railway's fault if something goes wrong, is it?

 

[Watershed]

Is it the passenger’s responsibility to prove that a ticket machine is out of order or the TOC’s to prove that it is functioning properly?

In a Penalty Fares appeal, it is always for the TOC to disprove any allegation brought by the passenger.

However, in the unlikely (but sadly not unheard of) event of an incident such as this making it to Court, the burden of proof would lie upon the passenger, to show that the exception set out in the Byelaws applied on the balance of probabilities.

In the absence of independent evidence (such as a video taken on a mobile device, or evidence from the TOC's TVM monitoring systems) it would be down to the judge or jury to determine whether they judged the passenger's witness testimony to be credible.

 

[trover]

Never the railway's fault if something goes wrong, is it?

Can’t agree more

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Mar 2022 ==

In a Penalty Fares appeal, it is always for the TOC to disprove any allegation brought by the passenger.

However, in the unlikely (but sadly not unheard of) event of an incident such as this making it to Court, the burden of proof would lie upon the passenger, to show that the exception set out in the Byelaws applied on the balance of probabilities.

In the absence of independent evidence (such as a video taken on a mobile device, or evidence from the TOC's TVM monitoring systems) it would be down to the judge or jury to determine whether they judged the passenger's witness testimony to be credible.

Is that because the TOC is deemed a reliable source of evidence in court?

 

[Merseysider]

Northern’s machines really are shoddy.

I once (accidentally!) caused a Northern machine to go out of service just by looking up the price of a 1st class open return to Wick (I was bored and the next train wasn’t for ages!)

You could also consider keeping a written record of dates/times the machine is out of service but that may be rather onerous.

For peace of mind either take a photo/video, email or message on social media the TOC concerned at the time, board at the guard’s door & mention it (though you are under no obligation to go hunting for them) or use the help point on the platform to report it.

However, several people have reported on here that the help points often connect to some clueless subcontracted call centre in a faraway land so I personally wouldn’t bother with the last one.

 

[Watershed]

Is that because the TOC is deemed a reliable source of evidence in court?

Generally yes - a defendant will often be given less credibility because it's in their interest to make up an account that corroborates their story.

That's not to say that you have to take a picture/video etc. to protect yourself, and as I say, it would be fairly unusual for it to end up in Court if 'all you've done' is to travel without a ticket, but it certainly doesn't hurt.

 

[skyhigh]

All Northern RPIs and guards now have an app that shows the live status of every Northern TVM, along with the time that status was last changed. If a machine freezes up, it will show on the app as a fault. However - that won't show if there is a fault with part of the screen so that won't let you select a railcard, for example. It will soon also show the last time a ticket was purchased, and when the machine registered an aborted/unfinished transaction (which would potentially confirm the passenger tried the machine but couldn't get the correct ticket).

I would suggest that if you're able to, it would be worth taking a quick video and tweeting it to Northern as it will get logged and investigated ASAP. To try and minimise any issues, I would also suggest that it's worth getting a promise to pay for the closest ticket you can select and explain to the guard why you couldn't buy one, and you shouldn't have any issues (although obviously there is no obligation to do either of these things).

 

[Trackman]

Is it the passenger’s responsibility to prove that a ticket machine is out of order or the TOC’s to prove that it is functioning properly?

All Northern RPIs and guards now have an app that shows the live status of every Northern TVM, along with the time that status was last changed..

I know someone who was stopped at Man Vic as they couldn't buy a ticket from a station TVM as it was covered in sick or whatever and wouldn't touch it.
At Man Vic it was penalty fare time even though they explained why, same old routine about appealing and all that.
They decided to tell them who their were (not railway related) and as if by magic the penalty fare was retracted.
If it was me, I wouldn't stand a chance.
Best taking a photo or even a video of whatever the problem is as mentioned up thread.

 

[pedr]

Can’t agree more

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Mar 2022 ==


Is that because the TOC is deemed a reliable source of evidence in court?

It isn't specific to railway law. The Magistrates Court Act 1980 s. 101 places the burden of proving any applicable "exception, exemption, proviso, excuse or qualification" on the defendant when pleading not guilty at trial in a magistrates' court.

Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980

An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to the jurisdiction of, and the practice and procedure before, magistrates’ courts and the functions of justices’ clerks, and to matters connected therewith, with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission.

www.legislation.gov.uk

 

[Factotum]

It isn't specific to railway law. The Magistrates Court Act 1980 s. 101 places the burden of proving any applicable "exception, exemption, proviso, excuse or qualification" on the defendant when pleading not guilty at trial in a magistrates' court.

Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980

An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to the jurisdiction of, and the practice and procedure before, magistrates’ courts and the functions of justices’ clerks, and to matters connected therewith, with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission.

www.legislation.gov.uk

As many postmasters discovered. The machine cannot be wrong

 

[Haywain]

As many postmasters discovered. The machine cannot be wrong

How many of those cases went through the Magistrates Courts?

 

[Watershed]

How many of those cases went through the Magistrates Courts?

The same principle applies in the Crown Courts. The assumption that the prosecutor's evidence will be reliable is usually a safe one, but it is not universally true.

Evidence presented by a private prosecutor - who manifestly has a 'bee in their bonnet' or a degree of vested interest, otherwise they wouldn't be prosecuting - should be particularly closely scrutinised.

 

[trover]

Evidence presented by a private prosecutor - who manifestly has a 'bee in their bonnet' or a degree of vested interest, otherwise they wouldn't be prosecuting - should be particularly closely scrutinised.

Here comes another (may be irrelavent) question, why could there be out of court settlement for criminal cases? For dispute or civil cases I understand, but how could an organisation (railway prosecutor) determine whether a person deserves going through legal process and judgement while they could be “bribed” by accepting those “investigation costs and compensation” paid by the person?

I’m a layman in terms of laws and I didn’t grow up in the UK so forgive me if my question seems silly

 

[Watershed]

Here comes another (may be irrelavent) question, why could there be out of court settlement for criminal cases? For dispute or civil cases I understand, but how could an organisation (railway prosecutor) determine whether a person deserves going through legal process and judgement while they could be “bribed” by accepting those “investigation costs and compensation” paid by the person?

I’m a layman in terms of laws and I didn’t grow up in the UK so forgive me if my question seems silly

For 95% of offences, anyone is allowed to prosecute them, sort of analogous to how anyone can bring a civil claim. So, just as you are allowed to settle civil cases out of Court, the same applies to criminal proceedings. It's just that it's fairly uncommon outside of the railway.

Now of course there are only a handful of organisations which have the processes etc. in place to bring lots of prosecutions - like the CPS, CMA, HSE, DVLA, SFO, Crapita on behalf of "TV Licensing" (the BBC), the RSPCA and of course the TOCs. And most of these organisations do have a degree of 'accreditation' in the sense that they are allowed to issue their own summonses (or Single Justice Procedure Notices for summary-only cases).

But in theory, you or I could bring a prosecution for any offence that doesn't specifically state that it must be prosecuted by the CPS or some other specific organisation.

If it sounds ripe for abuse, that's because it is. In my view, private prosecutions should be outlawed, as they are in most countries (including, de facto, in Scotland) - simply because the conflict of interest is far too great for a private prosecutor to be relied upon to reliably disclose exculpatory evidence, for example. And ultimately criminal law exists to provide punishment for things which 'breach the social contract' - it has no place being used to strong-arm people into paying disproportionate sums to resolve what would be a civil dispute in most other sectors.

At the very least, there should be stronger regulation, including private prosecutors being obliged to follow the same procedures and policies as the CPS - crucially including the public interest test, which is often sidestepped by private prosecutors purely acting in their own interests.

 

[Haywain]

It's just that it's fairly uncommon outside of the railway.

It's only considered uncommon because we don't hear about them. Many organisations can bring criminal charges but do settle out of court - the tax authorities, for example. You won't hear about the railway companies doing so unless you're on this forum.

 

[trover]

For 95% of offences, anyone is allowed to prosecute them, sort of analogous to how anyone can bring a civil claim. So, just as you are allowed to settle civil cases out of Court, the same applies to criminal proceedings. It's just that it's fairly uncommon outside of the railway.

Now of course there are only a handful of organisations which have the processes etc. in place to bring lots of prosecutions - like the CPS, CMA, HSE, DVLA, SFO, Crapita on behalf of "TV Licensing" (the BBC), the RSPCA and of course the TOCs. And most of these organisations do have a degree of 'accreditation' in the sense that they are allowed to issue their own summonses (or Single Justice Procedure Notices for summary-only cases).

But in theory, you or I could bring a prosecution for any offence that doesn't specifically state that it must be prosecuted by the CPS or some other specific organisation.

If it sounds ripe for abuse, that's because it is. In my view, private prosecutions should be outlawed, as they are in most countries (including, de facto, in Scotland) - simply because the conflict of interest is far too great for a private prosecutor to be relied upon to reliably disclose exculpatory evidence, for example. And ultimately criminal law exists to provide punishment for things which 'breach the social contract' - it has no place being used to strong-arm people into paying disproportionate sums to resolve what would be a civil dispute in most other sectors.

At the very least, there should be stronger regulation, including private prosecutors being obliged to follow the same procedures and policies as the CPS - crucially including the public interest test, which is often sidestepped by private prosecutors purely acting in their own interests.

Thanks Watershed! That’s very detailed. It’s really confusing to see that a private prosecutor is able to let a person who breaks the law and causes external costs to the society to get away while the prosecutor receives monetary benefits, although personally I don’t think many of them deserve those hefty penalties in the context of railway given the cases I can see from this forum. Putting “justice” aside, there’s at least kind of? conflict of interest isn’t it.

 

[trek]

Fortunately the guards all seem quite friendly about this, one of them even saying "Yes, that TVM is a bit iffy". But one day I am going to get a penalty

My advice beyond that mentioned would be to immediately approach the guard to buy a ticket. Northern guards do not issue penalty fares (so in the absolute worst case you just lose out on discounts and pay a full anytime fare, and if does occur I would suggest disputing via customer service) and do also have access to a mobile app to check TVM status, although I appreciate this will not always show every situation where the machine is rendered unusable.

Sitting down and waiting for the guard to come round leaves opportunity for revenue protection to board/come through and make accusations.

I'm not saying this is an obligation but making an active effort adds a lot more credibility to any explaination.

 

[Class800]

I understand that if a TVM, the only source of tickets, is faulty you are not in breach of the byelaws when boarding a train without a ticket.
But how do you convince the revenue protection staff that the TVM was faulty.?

The TVM at my local station seems subject to random faults. On Tuesday, for example, it would not let me select a railcard. A couple of weeks ago I could not select my intended destination station./

Fortunately the guards all seem quite friendly about this, one of them even saying "Yes, that TVM is a bit iffy". But one day I am going to get a penalty

When it's happened to me, once I told guard when boarding and he said he'd come through and do tickets and other time I went to find him ASAP. No issues either time. A TVM that is selectively malfunctioning is a bit more complex to explain. The ones I experienced were showing 'out of order'