Prosecuted for travelling using any day return T&Cs

[BongoStar]

It wouldn't be ignorance, more like wilful attempt. The fare isn't available on first sight when fares are searched. Anyone ignorant of how fares work wouldn't know any better to dig deeper, and select the cheapest one shown on the screen.

Here, the OP went out of his way to see what other fares were available and made the decision to buy an Anytime fare when a cheaper Offpeak fare was available.

This scenario is very different from the young person railcard story earlier in the month. In that case, the fare where he applied the railcard was the same regardless when you travelled. The discount only applied to tickets after 10am. One can be forgiven to assume that it's a glitch (I wouldn't) given the flat rate throughout they day.

Here, OP is well aware that off peak rates exist. He is well aware that he has signed T&Cs on Network card. The card says on the face of it that it's not valid for use before 10am.

Whether it's ignorance or wilful ignoring the rules, only OP knows.

 

[AlterEgo]

But don't the T&Cs also say that Crosscountry should have charged the difference or issued a penalty fare?

Yes. An excess is the only remedy available here; XC are not a Penalty Fares operator.

I’d be minded to send them a cheque for the difference in fare, quoting the TnCs and the NRCoT, as well as mentioning how the Transport Secretary just came down on another operator for wrongfully pursuing cases in this way.

Here, OP is well aware that off peak rates exist. He is well aware that he has signed T&Cs on Network card.

Which say this:

4.7. You will be asked to pay the difference between the price of your discounted ticket and the full price applicable fare (or the Penalty Fare if travelling in the Penalty Fares area) if you travel:

4.7.1. beyond the station for which your ticket is issued; or
4.7.2. to a destination beyond the area shown on the Network Railcard map (network-railcard.co.uk/map), without having first obtained the correct ticket for your journey; or
4.7.3. on a route to which a higher fare applies or at a time when reduced fares do not apply.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Oct 2024 ==

What other intention would the OP have to buy an Anytime ticket, if not to travel before 10am?

The default ticket and price it presents when 10:15 is selected is the offpeak day return for £17. OP has to make a conscious choice to select Anytime and pay 90p more.

It is clear OPs intention was not to travel after 10am but rather before.

None of this is relevant; the remedy available to the TOC is very clear and it is an excess fare, which the OP should offer without hesitation.

 

[BongoStar]

Yes. An excess is the only remedy available here; XC are not a Penalty Fares operator.

But don't the T&Cs also say that Crosscountry should have charged the difference or issued a penalty fare?

Given OP bought an Anytime and not an offpeak ticket, I don't disagree that an excess was a possible remedy.

What I am disagreeing with is OPs assertion that his ticket was valid for the journey. It wasn't.

 

[DeverseSam]

What other intention would the OP have to buy an Anytime ticket, if not to travel before 10am?

To avoid possible afternoon restrictions on the return portion as is sometimes the case

 

[slicedbread]

Given OP bought an Anytime and not an offpeak ticket, I don't disagree that an excess was a possible remedy.

The question, I guess, is was it not just a possible remedy but the only remedy given that by not complying with condition 4.3 (only to used mon-fri after 10am) 4.7.3 kicks in (paying the extra at a time when reduced fares do not apply)

Condition 4.7 does not mention prosecution as a possibility that's in the NRCoT 9.2

I guess it could be argued that NRCoT override the railcard T&Cs but I'd have thought the passanger should be able to rely on the most favourable.

On the use of a Network card with an Anytime ticket it can sometimes be the cheapest option. I was working in London on Monday and the cheapest option was an Anytime single in the morning before 10AM and an Anytime single with a Network Card discount for coming back just after 17:00

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I guess it could be argued that NRCoT override the railcard T&Cs but I'd have thought the passanger should be able to rely on the most favourable.

Per the Network Railcard T&Cs at https://www.network-railcard.co.uk/help/railcard-terms-conditions/:

1.2. In addition to the Railcard Conditions, the National Rail Conditions of Travel (“NRCoT”) apply to any journey on the rail network. Where the NRCoT conflict with these Railcard Conditions, the NRCoT override the Railcard Conditions. Copies of the NRCoT are available online at nationalrail.co.uk/nrcot or at staffed National Rail stations.

 

[slicedbread]

Per the Network Railcard T&Cs at https://www.network-railcard.co.uk/help/railcard-terms-conditions/:

1.2. In addition to the Railcard Conditions, the National Rail Conditions of Travel (“NRCoT”) apply to any journey on the rail network. Where the NRCoT conflict with these Railcard Conditions, the NRCoT override the Railcard Conditions. Copies of the NRCoT are available online at nationalrail.co.uk/nrcot or at staffed National Rail stations

Very true but then National Rail website says

While these National Rail Conditions of Travel set out your rights and any restrictions of those rights, the train companies may give you more extensive rights than those set out here. However, they are not permitted to give you less rights, unless a condition specifically allows for this, such as with some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets, like Advance tickets

It would seem odd to put in a T&C that says

4.7. You will be asked to pay the difference between the price of your discounted ticket and the full price applicable fare (or the Penalty Fare if travelling in the Penalty Fares area)

But then hit a passanger with a prosecution as the NRCoT says

9.2 If you are unable to present a valid Ticket when asked and the conditions set out in
Condition 6 do not apply, we are permitted in law to take one of the following measures:
9.2.1 To charge you the full undiscounted “anytime” single fare to a station
directly served by the train that you are on. You will not be entitled to any
discounts or special terms, or to a Ticket to a station other than one served
by the train that you are on; or
9.2.2 To charge you a Penalty Fare on certain trains and stations (see Condition
10 below); or
9.2.3 To report you for prosecution

So skiping over the T&C which seem to be 9.2.1 and 9.2.2 and use 9.2.3 which was not mentioned in the T&C

 

[AlterEgo]

The NRCoT does not give authority to prosecute. It merely states in general terms what can happen in 9.2. If you read that completely literally you’d think they were allowed to charge the full Anytime fare in this circumstance, but we know they are not, becuase 9.5 clarifies things because they are an exception!

In 9.4 it explains how if you have an otherwise invalid ticket owing to missing a booked connection on an advance fare that’s fine as long as you take the next available train.

It then lays out specific examples in 9.5 of how and when the railway *will* treat customers in this specific instance of travelling outside the time allowed on a time restricted ticket. It wouldn’t be in there if the train company was entitled to do anything more stringent.

The only remedy available to XC here is the excess fare.

 

[Kite159]

The NRCoT does not give authority to prosecute. It merely states in general terms what can happen in 9.2. If you read that completely literally you’d think they were allowed to charge the full Anytime fare in this circumstance, but we know they are not, becuase 9.5 clarifies things because they are an exception!

In 9.4 it explains how if you have an otherwise invalid ticket owing to missing a booked connection on an advance fare that’s fine as long as you take the next available train.

It then lays out specific examples in 9.5 of how and when the railway *will* treat customers in this specific instance of travelling outside the time allowed on a time restricted ticket. It wouldn’t be in there if the train company was entitled to do anything more stringent.

The only remedy available to XC here is the excess fare.

So in your eyes anybody can simply buy a ticket discounted with the railcard discount knowing full well they are planning to use it before 10am when the discount isn't valid and the only punishment will be paying the fare they should have paid in the first place if they get checked by a member of staff?

So paying only when challenged?

 

[Darandio]

So in your eyes anybody can simply buy a ticket discounted with the railcard discount knowing full well they are planning to use it before 10am when the discount isn't valid and the only punishment will be paying the fare they should have paid in the first place if they get checked by a member of staff?

So paying only when challenged?

What does 'in your eyes' even mean? Whatever anyone thinks of whether it's acceptable 'in their eyes' is irrelevant, the NRCoT gives provision for people to do exactly this.

 

[Kite159]

What does 'in your eyes' even mean? Whatever anyone thinks of whether it's acceptable 'in their eyes' is irrelevant, the NRCoT gives provision for people to do exactly this.

So there is nothing stopping a customer deciding to buy a network card discounted super off-peak ticket knowing full well they plan to use it in the morning peak knowing the only punishment they face under the NRCoT is simply to pay the difference to the anytime fare which they would have normally paid if they get caught by a member of staff when travelling between two unbarriered stations?

In which case, why do customers buy anytime tickets when all they can do is buy offpeak and only pay the difference on those DOO routes or when the trains are so overcrowded/frequent stops the guard can't do revenue on the odd-occasion they get caught out by a revenue block?

So paying what they should actually pay only when challenged?

 

[BongoStar]

So in your eyes anybody can simply buy a ticket discounted with the railcard discount knowing full well they are planning to use it before 10am when the discount isn't valid and the only punishment will be paying the fare they should have paid in the first place if they get checked by a member of staff?

So paying only when challenged?

I agree with you and am at wits trying to understand why anyone would defend an alternative position.

This topic has been discussed in the other thread on whether a railcard discounted ticket should be excessed or not. Don't want to repeat all the points again.

However, I will add that buying a railcard discounted ticket at a time it is not valid does not make the "ticket at wrong time" but rather an invalid ticket.

In case of OP, he didn't present a "discounted ticket" at a wrong time, he presented an invalid ticket because Network Railcard does not exist for discounts before 10am.

Therefore, NRcOT 8.5 can apply.

If you are travelling with a Railcard discounted Ticket and are unable to present the Railcard when asked by the staff or authorised agents of a Train Company, you will be treated as having joined a train without a valid Ticket and Conditions 9.1 – 9.5 will apply.

Given that a Network railcard was not valid for use at 8:15am, he cannot present a valid railcard for use on the journey and therefore is treated as an invalid ticket.

 

[Olympian]

So in your eyes anybody can simply buy a ticket discounted with the railcard discount knowing full well they are planning to use it before 10am when the discount isn't valid and the only punishment will be paying the fare they should have paid in the first place if they get checked by a member of staff?

So paying only when challenged?

The T&Cs for the type of railcard concerned do indeed appear to allow that to be done, unless in a penalty fare area when that would be charged instead of the fare difference, even if it seems like unacceptable behaviour to some people.

 

[BongoStar]

The T&Cs for the type of railcard concerned do indeed appear to allow that to be done, unless in a penalty fare area when that would be charged instead of the fare difference, even if it seems like unacceptable behaviour to some people.

In this instance, OP does not have a valid railcard to present at 8am. The Network railcard is not valid for use before 10am. So OP cannot rely on provisions relating to having a railcard and falling foul on other parameters. He is as good as no ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

So in your eyes anybody can simply buy a ticket discounted with the railcard discount knowing full well they are planning to use it before 10am when the discount isn't valid and the only punishment will be paying the fare they should have paid in the first place if they get checked by a member of staff?

So paying only when challenged?

In the eyes of the NRCoT, yes. That is the remedy.

Same with taking a different geographic route (YES - you may pay an excess on board, without penalty), and when breaking journey when not authorised. Same with me buying an Off Peak ticket and taking a train which would only be valid with an Anytime.

Before you get annoyed about this again, remember tens of thousands of journeys begin every day at unstaffed stations on the network where passengers may pay, as you say "when challenged" on board.

 

[Kite159]

The T&Cs for the type of railcard concerned do indeed appear to allow that to be done, unless in a penalty fare area when that would be charged instead of the fare difference, even if it seems like unacceptable behaviour to some people.

Better not mention the word penalty fare, you will get some posters spitting feathers about how those customers should only pay the difference between what they actually paid and what they should have paid

It's a bit like using the "Scan as you go" in a supermarket when a customer 'forgets' to scan items when putting it into their shopping bag, only to be discovered when the till flags up a random service check and they end up paying what they should have paid in the first place had they not tried to steal that item

 

[AlterEgo]

In this instance, OP does not have a valid railcard to present at 8am. The Network railcard is not valid for use before 10am. So OP cannot rely on provisions relating to having a railcard and falling foul on other parameters. He is as good as no ticket.

Nope, it's a time restricted ticket, plain and simple. That's why PFs aren't issued for this matter! Every RPI knows this.

This is not even remotely controversial - or wasn't - until Northern started wrongfully prosecuting people (and then got slapped down) and some people on the forum who don't work with tickets got very very annoyed about it.

 

[Olympian]

In this instance, OP does not have a valid railcard to present at 8am. The Network railcard is not valid for use before 10am. So OP cannot rely on provisions relating to having a railcard and falling foul on other parameters. He is as good as no ticket.

If that were the case then why has the second part of condition 4.7.3 specifically been included in the T&Cs?

 

[AlterEgo]

If that were the case then why has the second part of condition 4.7.3 specifically been included in the T&Cs?

There is no point arguing with people who begin at the point that the customer is wrong and should be taken behind the barn and shot. It is abundantly simple, the only remedy is an excess fare (or PF), the contract specifically says so, and if everyone whose pee got boiled about it could just focus their efforts on changing the NRCoT it would be a lot more productive!

 

[Kite159]

In the eyes of the NRCoT, yes. That is the remedy.

Same with taking a different geographic route (YES - you may pay an excess on board, without penalty), and when breaking journey when not authorised. Same with me buying an Off Peak ticket and taking a train which would only be valid with an Anytime.

Before you get annoyed about this again, remember tens of thousands of journeys begin every day at unstaffed stations on the network where passengers may pay, as you say "when challenged" on board.

The difference with those "tens of thousands of journeys" beginning at stations with no TVMs (or ticket offices) is the customer hasn't had the chance to buy a ticket due to the failure of the rail industry in not providing the equipment. Rather than someone trying to beat the system by booking that super off-peak ticket with a railcard discount when the railcard doesn't become valid until after 10am (as printed on the card) and using that super off-peak ticket in the morning peak knowing that the only punishment they face will be paying the difference if they get caught out.

All I can see happening is the NRCoT simply getting rewritten so if a customer wishes to travel under condition 4.7 they need to sort out any excess before they board, or simply removing the ability to excess fares in the first place. Either that or a move towards a LNER style "Anytimes" only policy when it comes to flexible tickets. After-all, you can't misuse that off-peak ticket if it simply doesn't exist, simples.

 

[AlterEgo]

The difference with those "tens of thousands of journeys" beginning at stations with no TVMs (or ticket offices) is the customer hasn't had the chance to buy a ticket due to the failure of the rail industry in not providing the equipment.

It does not matter. The NRCoT is very clear on this. By the way, a great many of those passengers do have the chance to buy the right ticket before boarding as you well know, because they have apps or online purchase (which I use all the time). But nobody gets cross at passengers who have these options deciding not to buy, and then hoping on the off chance the guard doesn't come down. Same mentality - and it is the passenger's intent you intend to be criminalised here.

Rather than someone trying to beat the system by booking that super off-peak ticket with a railcard discount when the railcard doesn't become valid until after 10am (as printed on the card) and using that super off-peak ticket in the morning peak knowing that the only punishment they face will be paying the difference if they get caught out.

There is no punishment at all. Passengers can change their travel plans, even when travelling, and not pay any sort of penalty. This is by far the only circumstance where the remedy is quite simply to ask the passenger for the proper fare.

All I can see happening is the NRCoT simply getting rewritten so if a customer wishes to travel under condition 4.7 they need to sort out any excess before they board

Well, yeah - and that would fix the situation to the satisfaction of people who think people are getting away with it.

 

[Kite159]

There is no punishment at all. Passengers can change their travel plans, even when travelling, and not pay any sort of penalty. This is by far the only circumstance where the remedy is quite simply to ask the passenger for the proper fare.

So even if they book that fare for the 14:00 train, knowing full well they are planning to catch the 08:00. "Oh silly me, my plans changed, can you charge me the difference to what I paid and what I should have paid"

So why pay the proper fare in the first place?

 

[yorkie]

Penalty Fares should not be issued for time restricted tickets, but this is a separate debate, not relevant here.

(And yes, I know some TOCs disregard the rules, but those TOCs are opening themselves up to legal action and class action claims)

Edit: just to add that the correct position is absolutely as @AlterEgo states it

(Note: This is not just a matter of opinion; I know that AlterEgo held a lofty position at a TOC, and was in a position to know the rules in detail and I can absolutely confirm this fact because it used to be the case that I would forward cases to AlterEgo to resolve in a work capacity. I have also discussed this matter with various other senior people in a position to know what the rules are, who agreed that this position is correct)

 

[AlterEgo]

So even if they book that fare for the 14:00 train, knowing full well they are planning to catch the 08:00. "Oh silly me, my plans changed, can you charge me the difference to what I paid and what I should have paid"

So why pay the proper fare in the first place?

I am going to point you once again to the National Rail Conditions of Travel and direct you to ask the writers for their rationale.

I'm not here to explain what they were thinking, just repeating time and time again on here that is what the passenger contract actually says, to people who simply cannot believe it has said that since time immemorial. You have always been able to do this and it has never been an issue until recently.

To drag this back on topic, I can only repeat the advice to the OP: the excess fare is due, and it should be paid. It ought to have been requested on board.

 

[BongoStar]

Any view that an excess is the only solution is based on the assumption that the ticket is otherwise valid.

It would take just one afternoon in court for any competent lawyer to debunk that. A ticket bought with a railcard when it was not valid for use renders the underlying ticket as invalid.

Going by the logic that excess is the only course of action when a discounted ticket is presented at a time it is not valid, I would argue why even bother buying a railcard or ensuring the correct one is used. Why not use 16-17 for a 50% discount and pay the difference when challenged? After all, entitlement to the discount at the given time has been thrown out of the window.

 

[pedr]

There are multiple slightly different conversations here, or that can be relevant.

There's the question of what consequences should (in someone's opinion) flow from having a discounted ticket at a time when the discount isn't available for that ticket. And there's the question of what the law and the contract between passenger and railway say those consequences are. These aren't the same thing - the law can be good or bad, from various perspectives, overly harsh or too permissive, depending on the point of view. And it can be misunderstood and misinterpreted by train companies and railway staff.

And there's the wider conversation about the proportionate balance between passengers who've misunderstood/failed to take full care to understand the various restrictions they have to follow and passengers who fully understand restrictions and seek to pay less than they know they should. What anyone thinks about how prevalent each group is, and the relative importance of detecting wilful under-paying vs being understanding of misunderstandings and oversight can affect how the whole discussion goes.

None of this is helped by the fact that the RoRA, the various Byelaws, the various Penalty Fare Regulations, and the NRCoT are written by different people, in different kinds of language, without anyone necessarily deciding before any drafting what the actual desired outcome is for various situations. It is, theoretically, possible for the Byelaws to make it a crime to take an action which the NRCoT says the consequence is paying the difference in fares. I think that would be a poor interpretation of the Byelaws, interpreted carefully, but a lot turns on potentially competing true meanings of 'validity'.

Taking a step back, there is some logic to the idea that boarding a train with no ticket or boarding the wrong train with an Advance ticket or a TOC-limited ticket are actions which can sensibly be treated relatively strictly. A person can be expected to take care to be certain of what they're doing if they have a ticket which spells out which train they should be on, or which train company's trains. (Short-distance Advances on high-frequency services perhaps excepted). On the other hand, travelling at Peak time with an Off-Peak ticket, or on a different route is both easier to do by genuine mistake (given the complexities of time restrictions), and there's good reason to allow time- and route-restricted tickets to retain all of their value if someone wants to travel at a restricted time, so charging the difference is a good policy. I think the RoRA offence is broad enough that a train company could prosecute for that if it can provide evidence to prove that the underpayment was deliberate, and not remedied before leaving the railway at the destination. Yes, that's partially pay-when-challenged, but unless and until it's as easy to excess a ticket as it is to buy a new one, that's probably the appropriate situation. Where using a railcard-discounted ticket at the wrong time fits there is debatable. I think (particularly since this can affect the validity of month-validity return tickets) it's closer to the off-peak/route restrictions, both because it can be an easy mistake to make and because deciding to start a return journey earlier than planned should be permitted for as long as we still have period return tickets.

 

[AlterEgo]

Any view that an excess is the only solution is based on the assumption that the ticket is otherwise valid.

No, it does not. The ticket is not valid, hence the excess fare is required. At any point in time, validity is binary. The ticket is either valid or it is not. In this case, being "caught" on a train travelling at the wrong time, it is not. And the NRCoT explains what the remedy to this is.

Going by the logic that excess is the only course of action when a discounted ticket is presented at a time it is not valid

(We're back to the ticket being not valid now? Okay!)

But...No, it is when a time-restricted ticket is not valid, and a ticket which cannot be used before 10am owing to the minimum fare imposed on it by a valid railcard is unquestionably one of those.

 

[yorkie]

Any view that an excess is the only solution is based on the assumption that the ticket is otherwise valid.

It would take just one afternoon in court for any competent lawyer to debunk that. A ticket bought with a railcard when it was not valid for use renders the underlying ticket as invalid.

If it is invalid due to at time restriction, and nothing else, then clearly the ticket is "otherwise valid" and the remedy is an excess fare.

Going by the logic that excess is the only course of action when a discounted ticket is presented at a time it is not valid, I would argue why even bother buying a railcard or ensuring the correct one is used. Why not use 16-17 for a 50% discount and pay the difference when challenged? After all, entitlement to the discount at the given time has been thrown out of the window.

If you continue to do this after being charged an excess and act in a manner that clearly indicates intent to underpay, then that could indeed escalate matters.

But for a one-off matter, an excess is clearly the correct course of action.

 

[BongoStar]

If it is invalid due to at time restriction, and nothing else, then clearly the ticket is "otherwise valid" and the remedy is an excess fare.

I think we will have to disagree here. A network card discount entitlement does not exist before 10am. So there is no ticket that can be presented with a network card that would discount it before 10am. The ticket is therefore invalid because the underlying entitlement to use it doesn't exist.

No different from using a railcard that you don't have/can never use. if the underlying entitlement to discount is ignored, then in theory, I could use a veterans card discount (which i dont have and am not entitled to either) and demand to pay excess when caught.

If you continue to do this after being charged an excess and act in a manner that clearly indicates intent to underpay, then that could indeed escalate matters.

But for a one-off matter, an excess is clearly the correct course of action.

So apparently we are saying that we have:
- ignored the entitlement to discount before 10am and it's consequences
- insisted that the only remedy is an excess
- accepted that intention to evade or not is not relevant, because the ticket says anytime

So if I repeatedly do what OP has done, on what grounds would ToC escalate? As long as I pay when challenged, it should be okay?



PS: I will refer to the other thread where I pointed out that there is a distinction between a time restricted ticket and a time restricted discount. The first one is excessable, which is why offpeak tickets are excessable to peak, but there is no excess for an invalidly claimed discount.

 

[yorkie]

I think we will have to disagree here. A network card discount entitlement does not exist before 10am. So there is no ticket that can be presented with a network card that would discount it before 10am. The ticket is therefore invalid because the underlying entitlement to use it doesn't exist.

A time restriction applies before 10:00.

No different from using a railcard that you don't have/can never use.

Nope, it's a time restriction.

if the underlying entitlement to discount is ignored, then in theory, I could use a veterans card discount (which i dont have and am not entitled to either) and demand to pay excess when caught.

This is a false equivalence and a 'straw man' argument; you do not hold such a Railcard and by your own admission you are not entitled to this discount. It would be fraudulent to deliberately obtain a discount to which you know you have no entitlement.

So apparently we are saying that we have:
- ignored the entitlement to discount before 10am and it's consequences
- insisted that the only remedy is an excess
- accepted that intention to evade or not is not relevant, because the ticket says anytime

The remedy for a time restriction is an excess.

So if I repeatedly do what OP has done, on what grounds would ToC escalate? As long as I pay when challenged, it should be okay?

If you are a good actor/liar, and only get caught once, then yes you would get away with it.

PS: I will refer to the other thread where I pointed out that there is a distinction between a time restricted ticket and a time restricted discount. The first one is excessable, which is why offpeak tickets are excessable to peak, but there is no excess for an invalidly claimed discount.

If it's a time restriction, it is a time restriction.

Discounts to which you have no entitlement, such as Veterans Railcard are false equivalents.