Penalty notice for unprinted ticket

[najaB]

To give no benefit of the doubt and to deny the help they wanted at their destination is despicable.

There is no right to discretionary treatment.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I think it's already been established that the traveller made a quick connection at Headbolt Lane so didn't have time to collect a ticket there, but can someone confirm whether it's possible to collect a ticket there? That is, is there a staffed ticket office, or if there's a ticket machine, is it one that tickets can be collected from (i.e. it's provided by Northern rather than Merseyrail)?

I ask because if the traveller couldn't have collected a ticket after the machine failure at Orrell but before the barriers at Moorfields then the argument becomes much easier to make rather than arguing over whether there's any requirement to delay a journey to collect a ticket part way (or any obligation to stick by the advertised connection rather than going for the quick connection as happened here).

 

[Haywain]

can someone confirm whether it's possible to collect a ticket there?

The Merseyrail website says that there is a staffed ticket office at Headbolt Lane.

 

[AlterEgo]

I think it's already been established that the traveller made a quick connection at Headbolt Lane so didn't have time to collect a ticket there, but can someone confirm whether it's possible to collect a ticket there? That is, is there a staffed ticket office, or if there's a ticket machine, is it one that tickets can be collected from (i.e. it's provided by Northern rather than Merseyrail)?

I ask because if the traveller couldn't have collected a ticket after the machine failure at Orrell but before the barriers at Moorfields then the argument becomes much easier to make rather than arguing over whether there's any requirement to delay a journey to collect a ticket part way (or any obligation to stick by the advertised connection rather than going for the quick connection as happened here).

The connection turned out to be 15 minutes (and in fact longer than that, as their train arrived 2 mins early) - so I don’t think arguing it was a “quick connection” and the passenger was going to delay their journey by collecting there will hold much water here.

 

[furlong]

As such, they would have been 100% in the right (legally) to charge them for a ticket to cover the journey they were making at that point.

As well as appearing to be a breach of contract as already explained, that would also be a breach of the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement, which concerns itself solely on whether the Fare has been Purchased (and incidentally uses a broader definition of Ticket that is capable of encompassing a booking confirmation).

 

[najaB]

As well as appearing to be a breach of contract as already explained, that would also be a breach of the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement, which concerns itself solely on whether the Fare has been Purchased (and incidentally uses a broader definition of Ticket that is capable of encompassing a booking confirmation).

I don't dispute that the fare had been paid, the problem is that the passenger had no evidence that it had been paid - at least none that the guard would have been able to verify. So, in isolation, the passenger presented themselves to the guard but were unable to produce a valid ticket. We have no evidence that the TVM was unable to sell tickets (the message in the photograph only says that collection was unavailable) so that defence against a Byelaw 18 prosecution is unproven.

The guard, presented with a ticketless passenger, had three options available to them: give them permission to travel, regularise the situation by way of selling a ticket, or report the passenger for investigation. I don't understand how you can interpret the situation otherwise.

 

[185143]

The Merseyrail website says that there is a staffed ticket office at Headbolt Lane.

I can confirm for a fact from experience of having used it, there is a staffed ticket office at Headbolt Lane.

And also the OP will have had to walk directly past the building it is housed in to meet the Merseyrail train. Obviously we are all making the presumption that it was open, most of not all MerseyRail stations are single staffed.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The connection turned out to be 15 minutes (and in fact longer than that, as their train arrived 2 mins early)

This may not be helpful to the OP, but just as a matter of accuracy, I think it was a tight connection:

- ticket as purchased was for an itinerary leaving Orrell at 0824. I am taking it as agreed that this was the train taken.
- RTT shows that this train reached Headbolt Lane at 0838 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:G31087/2024-06-06#allox_id=0) - two minutes early
- the PF was issued at Moorfields at 0908 so traveller must have been on a train that got there no later than that
- RTT shows that the 0841 from Headbolt Lane actually left at 0842, arriving at Moorfields at 0900 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C35516/2024-06-06) so before the PF was issued: the 0856 from Headbolt Lane did not reach Moorfields until 0915 (per itinerary plus two minutes delay), after the PF was issued.

Through the combination of the Northern train arriving early and the Merseyrail train leaving late at Headbolt Lane, the traveller must have made the tight connection there, not the advertised 16 minute connection.

 

[AlterEgo]

This may not be helpful to the OP, but just as a matter of accuracy, I think it was a tight connection:

- ticket as purchased was for an itinerary leaving Orrell at 0824. I am taking it as agreed that this was the train taken.
- RTT shows that this train reached Headbolt Lane at 0838 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:G31087/2024-06-06#allox_id=0) - two minutes early
- the PF was issued at Moorfields at 0908 so traveller must have been on a train that got there no later than that
- RTT shows that the 0841 from Headbolt Lane actually left at 0842, arriving at Moorfields at 0900 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C35516/2024-06-06) so before the PF was issued: the 0856 from Headbolt Lane did not reach Moorfields until 0915 (per itinerary plus two minutes delay), after the PF was issued.

Through the combination of the Northern train arriving early and the Merseyrail train leaving late at Headbolt Lane, the traveller must have made the tight connection there, not the advertised 16 minute connection.

Yes, they took an earlier train than the official connection there, by sheer chance. Waiting for the booked connection as per the itinerary sold to you can't be considered "delaying your journey". They had, in fact, 18 minutes. That's a luxuriously long connection!

 

[MotCO]

The guard, presented with a ticketless passenger, had three options available to them: give them permission to travel, regularise the situation by way of selling a ticket, or report the passenger for investigation. I don't understand how you can interpret the situation otherwise.

In post #1, the OP said the problem only occured when she tried to exit at Moorfields - it was barrier staff that stopped her, not the guard. Therefore, why didn't the barrier staff walk her over to a ticket machine to print the ticket. That would surely prove whether or not she was just stringing a line. If the ticket did not exist, or did not cover her journey, then issue a report for investigation. Any other action just puts passengers off from travelling by train.

To the OP: often the posters at stations informing passengers that the station is in a Penalty Fare area does not quote the wording required by the regulations. Are you able to go to Orrell station and take photos of the posters. Also, are the posters in prominent positions?

The wording required by the The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 are: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/366/schedule/1


1.—(1) A standard notice must contain—

(a)the penalty fares logo as shown in Part 3;

(b)the word “WARNING” in large, prominent text at the top of the notice;

(c)the wording “Please buy your ticket before you travel otherwise you may be charged a Penalty Fare”;

(d)[F1subject to paragraph (da),] the wording “A Penalty Fare is £20 or twice the full single fare applicable to your journey (whichever is greater)”;

[F2(da)in stations in England, the wording “A Penalty Fare is £100 plus the price of the full single fare applicable for your intended journey. However, if it is paid within 21 days, the Penalty Fare is reduced to £50 plus the price of the single fare applicable”;]

(e)wording which indicates where information about the circumstances in which a person may be charged a penalty fare in relation to travel by, presence on or leaving a train is published or may be obtained; and

(f)the logo, and name if the logo does not contain the name, of each operator that charges penalty fares in relation to trains arriving at or departing from the area of the station to which the notice applies.

(2) The absence of a logo or name, as required by sub-paragraph (1)(f), on a notice only invalidates the notice in relation to the operator whose logo or name is missing.

Often the wording in section (c) is different - e.g. 'may' is sometimes replaced with 'shall'. The exact wording per the Regulations must be used.

 

[najaB]

In post #1, the OP said the problem only occured when she tried to exit at Moorfields - it was barrier staff that stopped her, not the guard. Therefore, why didn't the barrier staff walk her over to a ticket machine to print the ticket. That would surely prove whether or not she was just stringing a line. If the ticket did not exist, or did not cover her journey, then issue a report for investigation. Any other action just puts passengers off from travelling by train.

Oh, without a doubt that would have been the most pragmatic way to deal with the situation. I was responding specifically to the poster who said that the first guard would have been in the wrong to charge for a ticket to cover the train that they were on at the time.

As it is the guard allowed them to travel and collect the ticket at their destination, so this is purely academic.

 

[Watershed]

Yes, they took an earlier train than the official connection there, by sheer chance. Waiting for the booked connection as per the itinerary sold to you can't be considered "delaying your journey". They had, in fact, 18 minutes. That's a luxuriously long connection!

Minimum connection times aren't codified in the Penalty Fares Regulations. In any event, the OP's wife was not on an Advance ticket so they weren't forced to stick to the booked trains.

The wording of the Regulation is purely concerned with whether:

the passenger did not have sufficient time between leaving one train and boarding the next to purchase a travel ticket.

The time between leaving one train (Orrell to Headbolt Lane) to boarding the next (Headbolt Lane) was - at most - 3 minutes (and likely less than this, in reality). No reasonable person would say that this is "sufficient time" to purchase a ticket.

The question, of course, remains as to whether the ticket machine was fully out of order or merely unable to print prepaid ToD (ticket on departure) tickets.

 

[jacksonbang]

And yet tens of thousands of people manage to travel by train every day without expecting or experiencing a hint of difficulty.

What does that even mean? That anyone with legitimate issues or badly trained/ignorant staff concerns should be ignored?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

In post #1, the OP said the problem only occured when she tried to exit at Moorfields - it was barrier staff that stopped her, not the guard. Therefore, why didn't the barrier staff walk her over to a ticket machine to print the ticket

Again, to clarify, Merseyrail ticket machines unusually (and I think uniquely) don't do ticket on departure (TOD) issue. You have to go to a ticket office who will print it off for you.

Of course, it probably makes no difference in this case as Moorfields has a staffed ticket office at both exits -b ut it can make a difference if the unstaffed M'rail stations in Cheshire are involved in a case.

(Edited to correct muddle in my thinking over relevant station)

 

[Haywain]

What does that even mean? That anyone with legitimate issues or badly trained/ignorant staff concerns should be ignored?

It means it's a reply to the specific postthat was quoted.

 

[GoneSouth]

The Merseyrail website says that there is a staffed ticket office at Headbolt Lane.

But was it open at the time? Probably not if my experience with ticket office opening times is anything to go by recently.

This all leaves a bad taste.

She was unable to collect her ticket due to the railway’s own failure to provide working facilities to do so. She was under instruction from a member of railway staff to collect her ticket at her destination, why is the burden of proof with the passenger on this point? Is there a barrier/ticket gateline at headbolt lane? If so she wouldn’t have had an opportunity to collect her ticket there either.

This whole thing stinks and Merseyside need bringing to task over their disgusting attitude.

 

[Parham Wood]

Why would anyone think to try to buy a ticket from the ticket machine in the event the machine fails to print the ticket they have per-bought?

 

[reb0118]

Why would anyone think to try to buy a ticket from the ticket machine in the event the machine fails to print the ticket they have pre-bought?

You'd be surprised. It's not common, but neither is it unusual, for passengers in this situation to ask me how they go about obtaining a refund for additional tickets bought due to being unable to pick up pre purchased ToD tickets.

 

[najaB]

You'd be surprised. It's not common, but neither is it unusual, for passengers in this situation to ask me how they go about obtaining a refund for additional tickets bought due to being unable to pick up pre purchased ToD tickets.

I dare say that a similar number make the refund request against the original tickets.

 

[John Palmer]

This appears to be a difficult case to bring within Regulation 6(2)(d) of the Penalty Fares Regulations 2018, i.e.:

“6.—(1) Subject to paragraph (6), a person travelling by, present on, or leaving a train (in this regulation “the passenger”) must not be charged a penalty fare where either paragraph (2) or (3) applies.

(2) This paragraph applies if, at the time when, and at the station where, the passenger boarded the train—
...
(d) the operator of the train or the station, or a person acting or purporting to act on behalf of the operator, indicated that the passenger was, or persons generally were, permitted to travel by or be present on the train without having a travel ticket.”

Paragraph (d) could only be applied to the case if the exchange in which the guard advised the OP's wife that she could print her ticket at her destination took place whilst her first train from Orrell to Headbolt Lane was still at Orrell station. Perhaps the OP could clarify the position in that respect.

A point which appears not to have been addressed is whether it was ever possible for the OP's wife to collect her ticket from the machine at Orrell, and the information published online is contradictory. The Nationalrail website says that collection of tickets bought online is not feasible, and the Raileasy site confirms that TOD is not possible. However, the Trainline website has the following:



This leads me to suspect that the Trainline site wrongly induced the OP's wife to believe that she could collect the ticket she had purchased from the machine at Orrell, and that the “Sorry, Collect Tickets is currently unavailable” message displayed by the machine is not an indication of fault in the machine but confirmation that it lacks the capability to dispense a pre-purchased ticket.

If, as the Nationalrail and Raileasy sites say, TOD collection from the Orrell machine is not possible then the Trainline website's incorrect statement that it is constitutes a seriously misleading assurance which affected passengers such as the OP's wife are entitled to raise as a compelling ground under Regulation 16(3)(d) of the Penalty Fares Regulations on which an appeal against the penalty fare should be upheld. It would be unconscionable for a TOC to seek payment of a penalty fare from a passenger where erroneous information about collection facilities that was supplied by Trainline acting in its capacity as the ticket retailing agent for the TOC concerned may have contributed to that passenger's inability to produce a ticket on demand.

 

[najaB]

The Nationalrail website says that collection of tickets bought online is not feasible, and the Raileasy site confirms that TOD is not possible. However, the Trainline website has the following:

I think that the information on NRE relates to the fact that there's no ticket office. I looked up a Northern-managed station that has a ticket office (Accrington) and under ticket collection it says to collect them from the machine:

Accrington Station | National Rail

Discover Accrington railway station. Getting to & from, buying & collecting train tickets, staffing, facilities, accessibility, & mobility access.

www.nationalrail.co.uk

------
Edit: Maybe not. For a while it looked like it was a thing - every Northern station I looked at which had a 'Yes' next to ticket office, even where it said 'Unstaffed' (like East Garforth) also said to collect tickets from the machine, but I found one that says 'No' but still says to collect from the machine.

All in all, it's not very clear.

 

[John Palmer]

I think that the information on NRE relates to the fact that there's no ticket office. I looked up a Northern-managed station that has a ticket office (Accrington) and under ticket collection it says to collect them from the machine:

Accrington Station | National Rail

Discover Accrington railway station. Getting to & from, buying & collecting train tickets, staffing, facilities, accessibility, & mobility access.

www.nationalrail.co.uk

Here's the relevant page as currently displayed on the Nationalrail website. Explicitly addresses the availability of a collection facility for tickets purchased online and makes it clear that it's not available:

 

[najaB]

Here's the relevant page as currently displayed on the Nationalrail website. Explicitly addresses the availability of a collection facility for tickets purchased online and makes it clear that it's not available

As per my update to the post you quoted - the data is confusing.

As is the message displayed in the photo saying collection isn't "currently" available, if it isn't available at all.

 

[John Palmer]

Sorry, hadn't seen the edit to your post at the time of uploading the Nationalrail image. Anyway, confusing though the information provided by Nationalrail may be, at least it has the merit of leaving the intending passenger with no expectation of being able to collect her ticket from a machine at Orrell, unlike the information provided by Trainline, the retailer concerned. The ticket in question was purchased just 24 minutes before departure time, so a check on the Trainline site that the ticket could be collected at Orrell would have lulled the passenger into a false sense of security, with no time to make alternative collection arrangements upon discovery that the Orrell machine wouldn't cough up the ticket.

 

[Haywain]

the “Sorry, Collect Tickets is currently unavailable” message displayed by the machine is not an indication of fault in the machine but confirmation that it lacks the capability to dispense a pre-purchased ticket.

I disagree. A TVM that is not appropriately connected to issue ToD would be expected to have that option greyed out on the home screen rather than showing an error message once it has been selected.

 

[Snow1964]

We have no evidence that the TVM was unable to sell tickets (the message in the photograph only says that collection was unavailable) so that defence against a Byelaw 18 prosecution is unproven.

I can't see any magistrate accepting the could buy another ticket argument. That's like saying if you have bought a new car, there is a problem and can't be driven, therefore have option to go and buy another car so can do your journey.

Legally might be a theoretical solution, but no one is ever going to accept should pay again if problem is not of your making.

 

[skyhigh]

This leads me to suspect that the Trainline site wrongly induced the OP's wife to believe that she could collect the ticket she had purchased from the machine at Orrell, and that the “Sorry, Collect Tickets is currently unavailable” message displayed by the machine is not an indication of fault in the machine but confirmation that it lacks the capability to dispense a pre-purchased ticket.

It is clearly a Northern TVM in the photo. They are all enabled for ToD collection. The message shown in the photo is when collection is unavailable in the short term for technical reasons, not because the capability isn't enabled.

 

[John Palmer]

the “Sorry, Collect Tickets is currently unavailable” message displayed by the machine is not an indication of fault in the machine but confirmation that it lacks the capability to dispense a pre-purchased ticket.

I disagree. A TVM that is not appropriately connected to issue ToD would be expected to have that option greyed out on the home screen rather than showing an error message once it has been selected.

Please don't distort my meaning by selective quotation from my post. I don't pretend to know the variations in what is displayed on TVM interfaces, and I made it clear in my initial post that the information supplied by the Nationalrail and Easyrail sites prompted nothing more than a suspicion that the display pictured might be indicative of the absence of ticket collection functionality rather than a fault condition.

If, as @skyhigh says, this is a Northern TVM and all such TVMs are enabled for TOD collection, then what is the explanation for both Nationalrail and Easyrail saying otherwise?

Whichever way you look at at it, the railway has exposed the passenger to penalty, either because of a fault in equipment it is supposed to provide so that she may fulfil her obligations or because of a false assurance given by its agent that she could collect her ticket at Orrell station.

 

[Haywain]

Please don't distort my meaning by selective quotation from my post.

I am not "distorting your meaning", and I am selectively quoting because that is the only element of your post that I wished to comment on. Your comment is, I'm afraid, a misconception (as confirmed by @skyhigh in post #57) which I was correcting.

then what is the explanation for both Nationalrail and Easyrail saying otherwise?

It is clearly out of date.

 

[island]

I can't see any magistrate accepting the could buy another ticket argument. That's like saying if you have bought a new car, there is a problem and can't be driven, therefore have option to go and buy another car so can do your journey.

This is not in any way a relevant or sensible analogy.

Legally might be a theoretical solution, but no one is ever going to accept should pay again if problem is not of your making.

Magistrates must apply the law, and the law (railway byelaw 18 (3)) says that a passenger is exempted from the obligation to buy before boarding if there were no facilities in working order for the issuance or validation of any ticket at the station where they started the journey. It does not seem that this exemption applies here. Magistrates cannot go off and decide "that's unfair I'm not having it" and dismiss the charge. It would, however, be open to the court to find the offence proven but give the defendant an absolute discharge (no punishment).