Mishandled Penalty Fare

[SuspectUsual]

Appealing should pause the 21-day payment clock, right?

It will do, yes

It’s just so frustrating – phone glitches can happen to anyone

Yes, it's very frustrating. But if you'd had an old-school card ticket and lost it, then found it later in the day, what would you expect to happen?

 

[Beaver42]

If all three appeals are rejected then yes.

Interesting they chose the Super Off Peak single fare rather than the Anytime. It could be worse.

OP, were you stopped on a train? If so, can you recall where (i.e. between which stations)?

I was already on the train, about 15–20 minutes after departing St Pancras, before we reached the next station (either Kettering or Market Harborough). During the usual ticket inspection through the carriage, the inspector came to check my ticket. At that point, my phone wasn’t functioning, so I showed her my ID and explained the situation. She allowed me to continue my journey without any issue and didn’t offer me the opportunity to buy another ticket on board – which, in reality, would have been cheaper than the penalty fare issued later.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

If you can't display your ticket then you have committed an offence. It doesn't matter whether this is because your phone glitched and refused to display an e-ticket or because you lost a paper ticket. It is your responsibility to ensure you can show your ticket.

I can understand why you are frustrated by this, but those are the facts.

Penalty Fare appeals are conducted in three stages. Stages one and two are conducted by 'independent' appeals companies which are, truthfully, anything but independent. Of the two appeals companies, one makes most of its money selling revenue protection software to TOCs and the other was actually directly owned by a TOC until fairly recently (and still has the same management as when it was owned by that TOC).

It is only the third appeal stage that is truly independent. As @AlterEgo says, unless you show the Penalty Fare notice to us and we can identify any issue, any appeal will be on the grounds of 'compelling reasons'. Buying a ticket and having a technical issue may be accepted as a compelling reason, but there is no guarantee- it is at the discretion of the appeals panel. If you can provide evidence of the ticket then they are certainly more likely to consider your 'compelling reasons' than either of the first two appeal stages are, but it is not certain. You may also wish to explain any other mitigating circumstances, such as whether you were given sufficient time to try and rectify the issue, e.g. by giving you sufficient time to attempt a fix such as rebooting your phone, and whether you were subsequently able to fix the issue.

I would appeal though, right to the end, make them earn their £50.

Here is the my penalty fare notice (I anonymised my personal details).

 

[Tetchytyke]

Appealing should pause the 21-day payment clock, right?

Yeah, each time you appeal the clock is paused. If you lose the third stage you would still have some time to settle the Penalty Fare at the reduced rate.

Should that happen, do ensure you pay it though, even if it feels very unfair. The law has recently been 'clarified' to let them subsequently prosecute you if you don't.

I generally avoid tickets tied to apps for this reason. At least with a normal e-ticket (which is really just a PDF) you have a fighting chance of being able to display the ticket on a different device if you need to.

 

[Beaver42]

Yeah, each time you appeal the clock is paused. If you lose the third stage you would still have some time to settle the Penalty Fare at the reduced rate.

Should that happen, do ensure you pay it though, even if it feels very unfair. The law has recently been 'clarified' to let them subsequently prosecute you if you don't.

I generally avoid tickets tied to apps for this reason. At least with a normal e-ticket (which is really just a PDF) you have a fighting chance of being able to display the ticket on a different device if you need to.

And it is within my right for them to provide a third appeal right?

 

[AlterEgo]

And it is within my right for them to provide a third appeal right?

Yes. You have three appeals.

 

[WesternLancer]

And it is within my right for them to provide a third appeal right?

You should certainly appeal to the 3rd stage (although I agree with the consensus of advice on here) - and it would be helpful if you can update us on how this plays out. The problem you raise does get flagged by others on here from time to time ('my phone died and I got a penalty fare') so it would help people advise other in future if we know how your appeals play out.

I will stand corrected but my understanding of the regulations around Penalty Fares (PF) is that for an appeal to be successful you have to be able to show that the PF was not issued correctly within the framework of the PF regulations - i.e. not that it was unfair or unreasonable to be issued with a PF - you are not appealing to their sense of reasonable as it were.

On some of your original points

• I am also preparing a formal complaint requesting cancellation and compensation for unnecessary stress, as I am a resident doctor and this has added avoidable pressure during an already demanding period.

Such a complaint would need to be made to the railway company. The Appeal process is handled by an independent body. But I would not do this until you have exhausted the appeal process.


Questions for the forum

2. Can they legally enforce a penalty fare in this situation despite proof of pre-purchased ticket and the inspector’s verbal assurance?

Yes, we see this on here occasionally - by which time the costs required to pay have escalated considerably including costs, court action etc etc. Far better to pay promptly and benefit from the £50 prompt payment discount IMHO

3. Would escalating to the Rail Ombudsman be effective if my re-appeal is rejected again?

Possibly tho a long shot. I think we have seen Transport Focus interventions occasionally being helpful in this regard, but probably cases that are not as clear cut as yours.

 

[saismee]

Would escalating to the Rail Ombudsman be effective if my re-appeal is rejected again?

Possibly tho a long shot. I think we have seen Transport Focus interventions occasionally being helpful in this regard, but probably cases that are not as clear cut as yours.

I wonder if paying the penalty fare and seeking some kind of reimbursement would amount to anything. Is the TOC going to argue that OP used both the penalty fare and their "invalid" ticket for the same journey?

 

[John R]

• I am also preparing a formal complaint requesting cancellation and compensation for unnecessary stress, as I am a resident doctor and this has added avoidable pressure during an already demanding period.

That reminds me of the complaint that was escalated to me in the delay in starting payment of a pension annuity and paying the tax free lump sum. The guy was adamant he needed compensation for the loss in interest and hassle. The reason for the delay? - he had given us incorrect bank details, and we had incurred additional extra cost because of his mistake tracing the funds. (It was years before automatic validation of account details.)

Bluntly it's ludicrous that you should complain about unnecessary stress - you are the one who failed to show a valid ticket when asked, and I haven't seen anything to suggest that the inspector did anything other than follow the proper process in dealing with you.

 

[WesternLancer]

I wonder if paying the penalty fare and seeking some kind of reimbursement would amount to anything. Is the TOC going to argue that OP used both the penalty fare and their "invalid" ticket for the same journey?

Interesting thought. I've no idea how that would play out.

 

[AlterEgo]

The issuance of a penalty fare has no bearing on whether the person paid for a ticket or even used that ticket, only on whether they could display it on request.

 

[Beaver42]

I wonder if paying the penalty fare and seeking some kind of reimbursement would amount to anything. Is the TOC going to argue that OP used both the penalty fare and their "invalid" ticket for the same journey?

They've made in total, almost £200 for a one way trip to Leicester, enough to fly to Europe there and back.

 

[AlterEgo]

The notice appears compliant, assuming it was issued on the 1402 departure from St Pancras, first stop Leicester.

Therefore you'll have to rely on "compelling reasons" as I see no reason that it does not comply with the Regulations.

 

[WesternLancer]

enough to fly to Europe there and back.

But not if you could not show your ticket at the airport

BTW - you do have my sympathy over all this.

 

[Kilopylae]

But not if you could not show your ticket at the airport

I recently had to pay £100 for an emergency passport because my passport was stolen.

I wonder how it would have gone for me if I had turned up to the airport, or complained to the embassy about the £100 fee, on the basis that I had purchased and checked in with a passport before arriving at the airport, but whilst the trip was in progress, it was stolen through no fault of my own....

 

[Beaver42]

But not if you could not show your ticket at the airport

Fortunately they check the boarding pass prior to boarding, and not mid-flight.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

I recently had to pay £100 for an emergency passport because my passport was stolen.

I wonder how it would have gone for me if I had turned up to the airport, or complained to the embassy about the £100 fee, on the basis that I had purchased and checked in with a passport before arriving at the airport, but whilst the trip was in progress, it was stolen through no fault of my own....

Yes but you did not lose the passport mid-flight. I showed up with my ticket and presented it at the terminal to be scanned for boarding.

 

[Starmill]

I recently had to pay £100 for an emergency passport because my passport was stolen.

I wonder how it would have gone for me if I had turned up to the airport, or complained to the embassy about the £100 fee, on the basis that I had purchased and checked in with a passport before arriving at the airport, but whilst the trip was in progress, it was stolen through no fault of my own....

I'm not sure this is a useful comparison. It's generally not an offence to not be able to show your passport on request, even in countries with an ID law, any form of government issued photo ID is usually acceptable. It's also not a penalty or disposal to pay for the processing fee for an emergency travel document. Finally this scenario is well within the scope of travel insurance, but a Penalty Fare would generally not be.

 

[Beaver42]

The notice appears compliant, assuming it was issued on the 1402 departure from St Pancras, first stop Leicester.

Therefore you'll have to rely on "compelling reasons" as I see no reason that it does not comply with the Regulations.

What would constitute a compelling reason for appeals such as these?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

As attached, the defensive argument by the Penalty Fares services as to why my appeal was rejected; their rationale is non-logical and does not take into account that prior to boarding, my ticket was valid and presentable, however this changed mid-transit, after I boarded the train.

Point 1:The digital ticket I purchased was fully functional and available for inspection before I boarded the train.
Point 2: There were no issues with purchasing or displaying my digital ticket prior to travel.
Point 3: It makes no sense to suggest that I should have purchased a separate valid ticket at the station when I already held a valid and functional ticket before boarding. The train company’s interpretation appears to be that my ticket was not valid prior to boarding, which is incorrect. Furthermore, once on board and in transit, I had no opportunity to purchase a replacement ticket.

 

[6Gman]

What would constitute a compelling reason for appeals such as these?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

As attached, the defensive argument by the Penalty Fares services as to why my appeal was rejected; their rationale is non-logical and does not take into account that prior to boarding, my ticket was valid and presentable, however this changed mid-transit, after I boarded the train.

Point 1:The digital ticket I purchased was fully functional and available for inspection before I boarded the train.
Point 2: There were no issues with purchasing or displaying my digital ticket prior to travel.
Point 3: It makes no sense to suggest that I should have purchased a separate valid ticket at the station when I already held a valid and functional ticket before boarding. The train company’s interpretation appears to be that my ticket was not valid prior to boarding, which is incorrect. Furthermore, once on board and in transit, I had no opportunity to purchase a replacement ticket.


View attachment 183136

You may wish to correct them on the matter in the three paragraphs you have shown.

But it does not alter the fact that you were unable to show a ticket when requested.

 

[Beaver42]

You may wish to correct them on the matter in the three paragraphs you have shown.

But it does not alter the fact that you were unable to show a ticket when requested.

There was no explicit reference in the appeal rejection that the penalty fare is concerned with the failure to present a ticket during transit.

 

[AlterEgo]

What would constitute a compelling reason for appeals such as these?

Well, it's an open-ended appeal to better nature, but some pretty iron clad examples I can think of would be:

- passenger has a disability (eg: learning disability) which renders their culpability moot and the penalty fare unjust
- passenger's ticket was destroyed or rendered unavailable by the railway's own direct action (eg: retained by a barrier)
- passenger probably fleeing a distress event eg: domestic violence and hasn’t approached Rail to Refuge
Just a few off the top of my head I’d personally consider compelling. But that would differ between people and between assessors.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

As attached, the defensive argument by the Penalty Fares services as to why my appeal was rejected; their rationale is non-logical and does not take into account that prior to boarding, my ticket was valid and presentable, however this changed mid-transit, after I boarded the train.

They’ve just rejected it and only needed to say one thing in the appeal response rather than attaching a load of stock paragraphs (it’s not been free handed!):

The National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) advise that where the facility to buy a ticket exists prior to


boarding, passengers should pay the correct fare for their entire journey before they travel and produce for


inspection a valid ticket as evidence of their right to make a journey on the relevant train, otherwise they


may be liable to pay a Penalty Fare Notice.



And that’s it. The rest of their response isn’t relevant and I wouldn’t bother addressing it or the erroneous attachment of the other paragraphs. It doesn’t matter if the barrier let you through, it doesn’t matter about anything else - the sole fact at play is you failed to present the ticket when asked.

 

[Haywain]

They've made in total, almost £200 for a one way trip to Leicester, enough to fly to Europe there and back.

If you book a few months in advance and accept a complete lack of flexibility. And, in any case, you didn't want to go to Europe, did you?

 

[Beaver42]

If you book a few months in advance and accept a complete lack of flexibility. And, in any case, you didn't want to go to Europe, did you?

A return flight to Nice with British Airways is £135, for a flight in 2 weeks

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

Well, it's an open-ended appeal to better nature, but some pretty iron clad examples I can think of would be:

- passenger has a disability (eg: learning disability) which renders their culpability moot and the penalty fare unjust
- passenger's ticket was destroyed or rendered unavailable by the railway's own direct action (eg: retained by a barrier)
- passenger probably fleeing a distress event eg: domestic violence and hasn’t approached Rail to Refuge
Just a few off the top of my head I’d personally consider compelling. But that would differ between people and between assessors.


They’ve just rejected it and only needed to say one thing in the appeal response rather than attaching a load of stock paragraphs (it’s not been free handed!):

The National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) advise that where the facility to buy a ticket exists prior to


boarding, passengers should pay the correct fare for their entire journey before they travel and produce for


inspection a valid ticket as evidence of their right to make a journey on the relevant train, otherwise they


may be liable to pay a Penalty Fare Notice.



And that’s it. The rest of their response isn’t relevant and I wouldn’t bother addressing it or the erroneous attachment of the other paragraphs. It doesn’t matter if the barrier let you through, it doesn’t matter about anything else - the sole fact at play is you failed to present the ticket when asked.

Would I therefore be entitled to a full refund because the penalty fare by default includes the price of the ticket. Furthermore, dishonest fare evaders would therefore have had an advantage over those who make genuine and honest misfortunes, by only paying the fare whereby i’m paying for both the fare and ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

Would I therefore be entitled to a full refund because the penalty fare by default includes the price of the ticket.

If it’s a refundable ticket (ie: not an Advance) then you could legitimately refund it and explain it was not used.

 

[Haywain]

A return flight to Nice with British Airways is £135, for a flight in 2 weeks

Great, so go to Nice in 2 weeks. It doesn't help with your journey to Leicester. I live within walking distance of an international airport and could find something like that every day, but it won't help me with the price of a train journey to a completely different place.

 

[Elecman]

A return flight to Nice with British Airways is £135, for a flight in 2 weeks

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==


Would I therefore be entitled to a full refund because the penalty fare by default includes the price of the ticket. Furthermore, dishonest fare evaders would therefore have had an advantage over those who make genuine and honest misfortunes, by only paying the fare whereby i’m paying for both the fare and ticket.

You could try and appeal to the original retailer showing them the Penalty Fare notice , BUT as your ticket was scanned at the barrier it is treated as used for travel so no refund would be forthcoming.

 

[Beaver42]

You could try and appeal to the original retailer showing them the Penalty Fare notice , BUT as your ticket was scanned at the barrier it is treated as used for travel so no refund would be forthcoming.

Which is rather frustrating because by definition I had a valid ticket prior to boarding. We shall see what the second and then subsequent third appeal conclude. Besides, I will pay the fare if unsuccessful to avoid court proceedings.

 

[Elecman]

Which is rather frustrating because by definition I had a valid ticket prior to boarding. We shall see what the second and then subsequent third appeal conclude. Besides, I will pay the fare if unsuccessful to avoid court proceedings.

Yes you did have a valid ticket prior to boarding and that ticket had been scanned at the barrier so now classed as used. Your problem is for technical reasons you could not present the ticket when requested hence the Penalty fare

 

[Hadders]

Given the phone appears to be at fault here, I'm surprised no-one has suggested complaining to the phone manufacturer.

 

[furlong]

So much confusion!

Firstly, did you post the whole notice or is there a bit missing? There MUST be a sentence saying you are entitled to a receipt if you pay. If that's missing, the regulations require an appeal to succeed.

Secondly, did you ASK for the penalty to be issued all the way to Leicester? By default it MUST be issued to the next station unless YOU request otherwise and the inspector agrees to such a request. Again, mandatory grounds for an appeal to succeed (though can be hard to explain).

Thirdly, you MUST explain in your appeal - right at the start - what you were told at the time, namely that if you produced the ticket the PF would be cancelled. The company (through the inspector) was not required to make you that offer but you can certainly expect to hold it to it (and it seems firmly in line with what parliament appears to have intended). It can be argued that this offer should be handled outside the appeals system and so, while you might naturally rely on the appeals system in the first instance, if all three appeals fail, you should write to the company directly about this, and if need be seek the assistance of Transport Focus. (You can also reference the analogy of a lost ticket mentioned originally in parliament: your case is more clear cut as your lost ticket was subsequently found.)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jul 2025 ==

Questions for the forum

1. Has anyone had success with similar re-appeals where a valid ticket became inaccessible mid-journey?
2. Can they legally enforce a penalty fare in this situation despite proof of pre-purchased ticket and the inspector’s verbal assurance?
3. Would escalating to the Rail Ombudsman be effective if my re-appeal is rejected again?

1) Yes, sometimes via formal appeal, sometimes via contact with the company.
2) Debatable. (I'd argue not.)
3) Unlikely. Transport Focus is a better bet.

The underlying key point is that nobody can have intended that the train company be paid TWICE over for a journey IF it can be proved with reasonable certainty that this is the case.

 

[bramling]

Hi all,


I’d appreciate your advice on my situation:

• I purchased and validated an e-ticket before boarding my train. It was successfully scanned at the station gates.
• While the train was in transit, my phone malfunctioned, making the ticket temporarily inaccessible when checked by the inspector.
• The inspector acknowledged that I had a valid ticket purchased before travel and assured me that the penalty fare issued would not be enforced.
• Despite this, my initial appeal was rejected. The rejection letter stated I should have purchased a valid ticket before boarding, suggesting they misinterpreted my appeal as an issue occurring before travel rather than during transit.
• I am planning a re-appeal, clarifying that I had purchased and validated the ticket prior to boarding and that the issue only arose mid-journey due to my phone glitching.
• I am also preparing a formal complaint requesting cancellation and compensation for unnecessary stress, as I am a resident doctor and this has added avoidable pressure during an already demanding period.

Questions for the forum

1. Has anyone had success with similar re-appeals where a valid ticket became inaccessible mid-journey?
2. Can they legally enforce a penalty fare in this situation despite proof of pre-purchased ticket and the inspector’s verbal assurance?
3. Would escalating to the Rail Ombudsman be effective if my re-appeal is rejected again?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

I’d echo the views of others that the penalty fare was reasonably issued, on the basis that a valid ticket could not - for whatever reason - be produced.

That’s not to say you couldn’t appeal, especially if you could provide evidence that the malfunction of the phone was something which wasn’t reasonably foreseeable - in other words a genuine equipment failure rather than for example forgetting to charge the battery sufficiently. However the success of any appeal is entirely at the discretion of the TOC, they essentially hold the cards.