How did I do the wrong thing?

[Nightingale]

After providing a statement explaining why I boarded my usual service without a ticket I have been issued with a fixed penalty notice. On the morning in question I arrived early at my unmanned station (Burley Park) to purchase my return ticket to Harrogate from the only ticket machine on the station. The machine was being used by another customer who turned to me and said his attempt to purchase a ticket had failed. I decided to try and purchase my ticket anyway but failed at the last stage. Instead of the usual screen showing the next available service including the 'pay now' and 'cancel' hot keys the window simply said 'no available services' with no options to continue. I then attempted to obtain a 'promise to pay' ticket but the same screen appeared - 'no avalable services'. I could not photograph the screen as my phone was dead. I have severe vision problems and I cannot use a smartphone in any useful way due to the screen size and my phone being ten years old with no financial hope of replacing it. I had my credit card in my hand when the revenue officer approached me on the train. I explained what happened and volunteered my details when requested. I was issued with no paperwork and the officer told me that he had believed me and would not proceed with a penalty fare. At Harrogate I was escorted to the gate by the revenue officer and was greeted by a retail officer who knows me to be a regular commuter (25 years) and asked me if the machine was out of order again. (This happens often!). A week or so passed and I received a letter requesting a statement which I forwarded explaining the above facts. I stated that CCTV would show me entering the platform to purchase a ticket and the log file of the machine would show the failed attempts from me and the previous user within a ten minute window. This seems to have been rejected and today I have received a fixed penalty notice. I have no criminal record of any kind and feel this to be unjust. I cannot afford a solicitor. Is there anything I can do?

 

[furlong]

Well write back again firmly but politely, repeating what you already told them? What they call "fixed penalty notices" are nothing of the sort and are disgracefully designed to mislead. If you study the small print you'll realise they think they have enough evidence to prosecute you, and the letter is an offer to agree not to prosecute you in return for paying the sum requested in compensation (fare + average costs of dealing with one of these matters). If you think a prosecution would succeed or it's worth paying to avoid any more hassle, then pay. However, from what you have said, a prosecution, if challenged on the point, would need to prove that there were facilities at the station in working order that you could have used: people sum up the law as saying you need to pay your fare (in full) at the first opportunity available to you. Perhaps remind them that your previous letter mentioned both CCTV and ticket machine log files so you trust that steps have already been taken to preserve both of these and ask specifically whether or not they were examined in relation to your case before issuing that letter.

(We've seen similar situations before where a letter like this gets sent out without a proper examination of the facts and they later back down.)

 

[island]

However, from what you have said, a prosecution, if challenged on the point, would need to prove that there were facilities at the station in working order that you could have used

This is not correct.

If in a prosecution under railway byelaw 18 the defence claims that no working ticketing facilities were available at the station, the burden of proving same falls on the defence, who must prove it was more likely than not (also known as “on the balance of probabilities”).

See section 101 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980.

 

[Watershed]

This is not correct.

If in a prosecution under railway byelaw 18 the defence claims that no working ticketing facilities were available at the station, the burden of proving same falls on the defence, who must prove it was more likely than not (also known as “on the balance of probabilities”).

See section 101 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980.

Although if (as seems likely) Northern fail to retain exculpatory CCTV and TVM records, the Magistrate(s)/Judge(s) may draw their own inferences.

 

[Nightingale]

Thank you for your replies. It seems that an innocent person cannot defend themselves against this (nationalised) company. They also charged me for a ticket which the revenue officer literally witnessed me purchase at the barrier. I have paid them in full. HOWEVER I have also resigned from my job as a specialist engineer with the local authority. That means Northern have lost the chance of £26000 in revenue (13 years before retirement). I will continue working for the local authority as a freelance engineer but at 2.5 x my current salary in addition to p.d. expenses (taxis) @ £70 per shift. "Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences" (R.L.Stevenson).

 

[Haywain]

HOWEVER I have also resigned from my job as a specialist engineer with the local authority. That means Northern have lost the chance of £26000 in revenue (13 years before retirement). I will continue working for the local authority as a freelance engineer but at 2.5 x my current salary in addition to p.d. expenses (taxis) @ £70 per shift.

And you've done this just to spite Northern, with no self-interest at all?

 

[fandroid]

This is not correct.

If in a prosecution under railway byelaw 18 the defence claims that no working ticketing facilities were available at the station, the burden of proving same falls on the defence, who must prove it was more likely than not (also known as “on the balance of probabilities”).

See section 101 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980.

If that's the case, then there should be a large sign on every ticket machine mentioning the risk of prosecution if it's out of order and the prospective purchaser boards a train! Sorry, this comment doesn't help the OP at all, but it's worth bringing to everyone's attention.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thank you for your replies. It seems that an innocent person cannot defend themselves against this (nationalised) company. They also charged me for a ticket which the revenue officer literally witnessed me purchase at the barrier. I have paid them in full. HOWEVER I have also resigned from my job as a specialist engineer with the local authority. That means Northern have lost the chance of £26000 in revenue (13 years before retirement). I will continue working for the local authority as a freelance engineer but at 2.5 x my current salary in addition to p.d. expenses (taxis) @ £70 per shift. "Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences" (R.L.Stevenson).

Yes, it's essentially the government that seems to want to turn the railway into a 'hostile environment' in my view - as part of their proposals to reduce costs through staffing etc so a zero tolerance approach on ticketing issues is a part of this.

 

[Hadders]

I would write back to Northern pointing out that that you were unable to purchase a ticket due to the ticket vending machine not accepting your preferred method pf payment. Consequently you boarded the train and intended to purchase a ticket at the earliest opportunity, in accordance with Section 6.1.3 of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. Also state that you purchased a ticket upon arrival at Harrogate station.

Ask Northern to confirm that they will be taking no further action in respect of this.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I would write back to Northern pointing out that that you were unable to purchase a ticket due to the ticket vending machine not accepting your preferred method pf payment, and furthermore you couldn't obtain a promise to pay. Consequently you boarded the train and intended to purchase a ticket at the earliest opportunity, in accordance with Section 6.1.3 of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. Also state that you purchased a ticket upon arrival at Harrogate station.

Ask Northern to confirm that they will be taking no further action in respect of this.

 

[Hadders]

A Promise to Pay is only relevant if paying with cash. The OP wished to pay by card.

 

[SuspectUsual]

A Promise to Pay is only relevant if paying with cash. The OP wished to pay by card.

To me it’s a further demonstration of (i) the machine being broken and (ii) the OP genuinely trying to do the right thing

 

[Hadders]

To me it’s a further demonstration of (i) the machine being broken and (ii) the OP genuinely trying to do the right thing

I agree but if this is mentioned in the reply then I think care needs to be taken to get the wording exactly right.

If it’s left out, and Northern reply saying you should’ve got a Promise to Pay, then it’s easy to bat it away by saying that a PtP only applies if intending to pay by cash.

 

[Nightingale]

And you've done this just to spite Northern, with no self-interest at all?

Not at all. I believe I have no choice because I will no longer be confident that I can travel honestly without the threat of penalty fares which I cannot afford on my current salary. As mentioned in my original post, I have worked for the local authority for 25 years. I could have gone freelance at any time. Also, the market rate for my specialism is 3.5 x my salary and my employer is free not to offer any work. I'd call it restorative justice.

 

[fandroid]

The rules say a Promise to Pay must be obtained "if the customer does not have the facility to pay by credit/debit card".

They won't have the facility to pay in that way if the machine isn't functioning correctly.

 

[Hadders]

The rules say a Promise to Pay must be obtained "if the customer does not have the facility to pay by credit/debit card".

They won't have the facility to pay in that way if the machine isn't functioning correctly.

A credit or debit card is a valid method payment and if the TVM doesn’t accept cards that doesn’t mean the passenger has to use a different payment method. A Promise to Pay only has to be obtained if you intend to pay with cash.

 

[BrianW]

A credit or debit card is a valid method payment and if the TVM doesn’t accept cards that doesn’t mean the passenger has to use a different payment method. A Promise to Pay only has to be obtained if you intend to pay with cash.

Hoping taht my posting makes a supportive contributiion to the thread- a number of postings help confirm something of the complexities of interfacing with 'the system-. To my mind the inability of the railway to empathise with the customer (innded what may be perceived as unhelpful attitudes and actions) contributes to peopole giving up on travel by train, much of which id increasibly discretionary. Please fogive my 'typos'- I had a stroke and am recoevring (slowly it seems). It takes me time to mwrite it letalone correct

 

[fandroid]

The rules say a Promise to Pay must be obtained "if the customer does not have the facility to pay by credit/debit card".

They won't have the facility to pay in that way if the machine isn't functioning correctly.

A credit or debit card is a valid method payment and if the TVM doesn’t accept cards that doesn’t mean the passenger has to use a different payment method. A Promise to Pay only has to be obtained if you intend to pay with cash.

I was quoting (see quote at the top of this post) from the Northern website which doesn't actually mention cash https://www.northernrailway.co.uk/legal/penalty-fares

I know it's sophistry to interpret it this way, but it's a possible loophole.