Penalty Fare Notice - Travel on incorrect railcard

[jwinger1975]

Hi, my 17 year old daughter received a penalty fare notice this past Saturday which I'd like to appeal and looking for guidance on likelihood of a successful appeal outcome. Details below:

• Ticket booked was a Super Off-Peak day return from Bedford to Stratford International, changing at St Pancras International
• I booked the ticket on her behalf as she was travelling the outbound journey with my wife and I
• Tickets booked via Trainline on the morning of Saturday, 9/8 prior to leaving for the station - 3 adult Super Off-Peak Day Returns with 3 railcards - 16-17 Saver for my daughter and Network Railcards for my wife and me. Total cost, minus Trainline booking fee was £56.70, broken down as £20.60 each for my wife and me, and £15.50 for my daughter
• My mistake was that I thought she had a 16-17 Saver railcard, but had not realised that about 3 weeks ago, her 16-17 Saver was expiring and she renewed with a 16-25 Railcard as she will be turning 18 later this month. The difference in fare between a 16-17 Saver and a 16-25 Railcard would have been £5.10 for the return journey
• During the outbound journey, whilst she was with my wife and me, no ticket inspection occurred
• During her inbound journey, on the EMR train from St Pancras International to Bedford, a ticket inspector issued her a Penalty Fare Notice, attached here for reference.
• She attempted to explain that her Dad had booked the ticket and mistakenly booked with a 16-17 Saver railcard, as he hadn't realised that she'd changed to a 16-25 Railcard a few weeks ago. A couple that she'd been chatting with on the train attempted to speak to the ticket inspector as well, pointing out it sounded like an innocent mistake and suggesting that instead of giving a Penalty Fare, they instead take the small difference in fare between the two railcards - even offering to pay the small difference on her behalf. However, the Penalty Fare Notice was issued on the spot.

The outcome I'm hoping for is a cancellation of the Penalty Fare and instead we pay the £5.10 fare difference, as this was a genuine mistake.

Please let me know if any further information is required to assist and thanks in advance for any guidance.

 

[Haywain]

On the face of it, the issue of a Penalty Fare is an appropriate response to what happened as there is not an accusation of dishonesty involved. Paying the difference in fares is not an available option as the ticket held was not valid, and cannot be made valid by paying the difference.

 

[John R]

Penalty Fares are used in the case of genuine mistakes, so I’m afraid any appeal on such grounds would fail.

 

[ainsworth74]

Yes as painful as this one might be I think it actually is an instance of a PF being charged correctly to deal with an innocent mistake. Obviously hurts as the difference is £5.10 and it's the railway industries own internal decision not allow excesses (i.e. pay the difference) in cases involving issues with railcards. But on its face that is a legitimate PF.

[Above revised following later posts, below remains for posterity]

It's possible there are some highly technical grounds for appeal. For instance for a PF to be valid there must be appropriate signage at the entrance to platforms and around the station, that signage must also have a the legally prescribed form of wording on it as well. In our experience often times the signage does not have the correct wording and/or is not present with sufficient visibility to mee the statutory requirements. This can give grounds for a successful appeal (though it requires appealing all the way to the third stage to be successful). But as I say it is a very technical argument.

 

[Honestviews]

Obviously hurts as the difference is £5.10 and it's the railway industries own internal decision not allow excesses (i.e. pay the difference) in cases involving issues with railcards. But on its face that is a legitimate PF.

I was intrigued by the comment around not allowing excess. I was on a SWR train on Friday and that was exactly what happened to someone who's railcard had expired. They were even told that is they renew their railcard at the ticket office they would be refunded the difference.

 

[WesternLancer]

I was intrigued by the comment around not allowing excess. I was on a SWR train on Friday and that was exactly what happened to someone who's railcard had expired. They were even told that is they renew their railcard at the ticket office they would be refunded the difference.

I doubt they would be refunded the difference but interesting point

 

[MotCO]

Please can you detail where you were issued the Penalty Fare (i.e. between which stations), did the train stop at a station before it arrived at St Pancras, and if so, was the Penalty Fare issued to that station, or did you elect for it to be issued to St Pancras or indeed Stratford?

 

[AlterEgo]

I was intrigued by the comment around not allowing excess. I was on a SWR train on Friday and that was exactly what happened to someone who's railcard had expired. They were even told that is they renew their railcard at the ticket office they would be refunded the difference.

No, they wouldn't. That's confusing the rules around forgotten season tickets.

OP's daughter got intercepted by an RPI rather than a guard so the child was gunned down in broad daylight for a (likely unenforceable, owing to their age) penalty fare.

Regardless of the *decision to PF* being in line with the law - OP, it's important you lodge an appeal, so please upload a copy of the notice with her personal details removed, so we can see if it was actually lawfully issued. (sorry just seen the attachment)

 

[MotCO]

No, they wouldn't. That's confusing the rules around forgotten season tickets.

OP's daughter got intercepted by an RPI rather than a guard so the child was gunned down in broad daylight for a (likely unenforceable, owing to their age) penalty fare.

Regardless of the *decision to PF* being in line with the law - OP, it's important you lodge an appeal, so please upload a copy of the notice with her personal details removed, so we can see if it was actually lawfully issued. (sorry just seen the attachment)

There is nothing to be lost in lodging an appeal; until recently, it protects you against the case escalating to Court action, but this benefit is now in doubt following a Court ruling, but there is no harm in appealing. If nothing else, it buys you a bit more time since the appeal stops the clock ticking.

 

[soil]

This PF is invalid and MUST be cancelled following appeal, as per Regulation 9(6), given that the appropriate fare is based on the day and time of travel.

Here this would be the super off-peak single, which is £21 rather than your (anytime) £34.80

 

[SuspectUsual]

This PF is invalid and MUST be cancelled following appeal, as per Regulation 9(6), given that the appropriate fare is based on the day and time of travel.

Here this would be the super off-peak single, which is £21 rather than your £34.80

I think we need to be careful in our advice. Yes, you're right, but this is the railway we're dealing with. We cannot say MUST with any degree of certainty; we cannot guarantee it will happen. I think we ought to say SHOULD

Other contributors' views welcome on this

 

[soil]

I think we need to be careful in our advice. Yes, you're right, but this is the railway we're dealing with. We cannot say MUST with any degree of certainty; we cannot guarantee it will happen. I think we ought to say SHOULD

Other contributors' views welcome on this

This is indeed a MUST. It is mandated by law. We should never imply that the railway can have contempt for the law.

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018

These Regulations make provision for the charging of penalty fares for the failure to produce, when required to do so, a ticket or other authority authorising a person to travel by train or to be present in a compulsory ticket area at a station.

www.legislation.gov.uk

(3) The grounds on which an appeal under this regulation may be made are that—

(a)the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations;

(b)the appellant is not the person liable for the payment of the penalty fare;

(c)the appellant owns a season ticket valid for the journey in question but was not in possession of the season ticket at the time the penalty fare was charged; or

(d)there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the appellant should not be liable to pay the penalty fare.

(7) If the relevant Appeal Panel, after considering an appeal under this regulation, concludes that any ground specified in paragraph (3) applies, it must, subject to paragraph (10), allow the appeal.

 

[MotCO]

I think we need to be careful in our advice. Yes, you're right, but this is the railway we're dealing with. We cannot say MUST with any degree of certainty; we cannot guarantee it will happen. I think we ought to say SHOULD

Other contributors' views welcome on this

I think we have seen instances where a PF has been incorrectly issued, and has then been cancelled for (spurious) reasons without actually conceding that the PF was incorrect.

 

[SuspectUsual]

This is indeed a MUST. It is mandated by law. We should never imply that the railway can have contempt for the law.

I admire your faith in the railway

 

[AlterEgo]

This is indeed a MUST. It is mandated by law. We should never imply that the railway can have contempt for the law.

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018

These Regulations make provision for the charging of penalty fares for the failure to produce, when required to do so, a ticket or other authority authorising a person to travel by train or to be present in a compulsory ticket area at a station.

www.legislation.gov.uk

(3) The grounds on which an appeal under this regulation may be made are that—

(a)the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations;

(b)the appellant is not the person liable for the payment of the penalty fare;

(c)the appellant owns a season ticket valid for the journey in question but was not in possession of the season ticket at the time the penalty fare was charged; or

(d)there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the appellant should not be liable to pay the penalty fare.

(7) If the relevant Appeal Panel, after considering an appeal under this regulation, concludes that any ground specified in paragraph (3) applies, it must, subject to paragraph (10), allow the appeal.

Agree entirely with this. Good spot on the fare - it's contrary to the law and causes harm to the passenger by overcharging them (not that the latter should be relevant!). I'm confident this will be overturned on appeal.

 

[MotCO]

This is indeed a MUST. It is mandated by law. We should never imply that the railway can have contempt for the law.

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018

These Regulations make provision for the charging of penalty fares for the failure to produce, when required to do so, a ticket or other authority authorising a person to travel by train or to be present in a compulsory ticket area at a station.

www.legislation.gov.uk

(3) The grounds on which an appeal under this regulation may be made are that—

(a)the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations;

(b)the appellant is not the person liable for the payment of the penalty fare;

(c)the appellant owns a season ticket valid for the journey in question but was not in possession of the season ticket at the time the penalty fare was charged; or

(d)there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the appellant should not be liable to pay the penalty fare.

(7) If the relevant Appeal Panel, after considering an appeal under this regulation, concludes that any ground specified in paragraph (3) applies, it must, subject to paragraph (10), allow the appeal.

I agree it should be a 'must', but sometimes the railway is literally a law unto themselves.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I agree it should be a 'must', but sometimes the railway is literally a law unto themselves.

Exactly my point, and as long as that's the case we should be giving pragmatic and realistic advice to people who come seeking help

 

[Haywain]

It would also be useful to know exactly which train she was travelling on. If it was the 18:15 from St Pancras the PF should only have been issued to Luton Airport Parkway, unless Bedford had been requested.

 

[ainsworth74]

This PF is invalid and MUST be cancelled following appeal, as per Regulation 9(6), given that the appropriate fare is based on the day and time of travel.

Here this would be the super off-peak single, which is £21 rather than your (anytime) £34.80

Good spot and I agree with this and have revised my original post accordingly.

@jwinger1975 your daughter appears to have a very solid ground of appeal on the basis that the PF was not correctly issued as the wrong fare has been charged. If you would like help drafting an appeal letter please do have a first stab an we will be happy to help you proof read and tweak as needed.

 

[jwinger1975]

Thanks for all the feedback! I lodged an appeal a couple of hours ago, saying it was genuine mistake, before soil pointed out the wrong fare was applied to the penalty fare. If this initial appeal is rejected, I'll raise a second appeal pointing out that they've not applied the correct penalty fare.

 

[soil]

It would also be useful to know exactly which train she was travelling on. If it was the 18:15 from St Pancras the PF should only have been issued to Luton Airport Parkway, unless Bedford had been requested.

I think it was the 18:15.

For reference:

STP - LTN - £19.20/£14.40 anytime/super-offpeak
LTN - BDM £12.60/£9.40
STP - BDM £34.80/£21

As per the regs the PF should be issued to:

The penalty fare charged to a person travelling by or present on a train authorises a person to travel to—

(a)a station in England at which the train is due to make a scheduled call that they may specify, if the collector considers that this is reasonable in all the circumstances; or

(b)otherwise, the next station at which the train is due to make a scheduled call

The fare structure is quite complicated/inconsistent, such that the £21 STP-BDM fare vs £20.65 for STP-LTN without railcard, plus LTN-BDM with is basically the same.

It's not clear how a passenger "specifies" here, but I guess the basic principle is that the passenger should be asked specifically whether they want their PF issued to Bedford or to the next station, and explaining the effect of this (need to buy another ticket LTN -BDM, or alight at LTN) rather than a more general "where are you travelling to?"

 

[WesternLancer]

Thanks for all the feedback! I lodged an appeal a couple of hours ago, saying it was genuine mistake, before soil pointed out the wrong fare was applied to the penalty fare. If this initial appeal is rejected, I'll raise a second appeal pointing out that they've not applied the correct penalty fare.

Yes, I would do this - AIUI a 'genuine mistake' is not grounds for a Penalty Fare (PF) Appeal - such appeals, to be successful, have to be based on the fact that the PF has been incorrectly issued in terms of the regulations that govern the PF system. ie you can't appeal on the basis that it wasn't fair to issue a PF because the wrong ticket was an honest mistake. But the other suggestions on the basis of an Appeal given here in the thread are much stronger.

It's worth noting (and the forum is littered with examples of this) passengers travelling with the wrong railcard applied to their ticket regularly get 'reported for investigation' as the front line staff pass it to the back office so that a trawl of past purchases can be conducted to find put how often that might have happened before it's been noticed on a train (some cases on here involve months or even years of wrongly applied discounts after Railcards expired and passengers forgot about it but still bought discounted tickets) - which the railway can then seek to recoup against threat of court action with no right of Appeal.

I'm not saying don't appeal, but a Penalty fare is often the least worst sanction that staff can issue, apart from a verbal ticking off.

 

[soil]

Yes, I would do this - AIUI a 'genuine mistake' is not grounds for a Penalty Fare (PF) Appeal - such appeals, to be successful, have to be based on the fact that the PF has been incorrectly issued in terms of the regulations that govern the PF system. ie you can't appeal on the basis that it wasn't fair to issue a PF because the wrong ticket was an honest mistake. But the other suggestions on the basis of an Appeal given here in the thread are much stronger.

the possible ground is "(d)there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the appellant should not be liable to pay the penalty fare."

This is not necessarily "a genuine mistake", but a genuine mistake could constitute compelling reasons - there doesn't appear to be guidance on this point.

 

[jwinger1975]

Yes, I would do this - AIUI a 'genuine mistake' is not grounds for a Penalty Fare (PF) Appeal - such appeals, to be successful, have to be based on the fact that the PF has been incorrectly issued in terms of the regulations that govern the PF system. ie you can't appeal on the basis that it wasn't fair to issue a PF because the wrong ticket was an honest mistake. But the other suggestions on the basis of an Appeal given here in the thread are much stronger.

It's worth noting (and the forum is littered with examples of this) passengers travelling with the wrong railcard applied to their ticket regularly get 'reported for investigation' as the front line staff pass it to the back office so that a trawl of past purchases can be conducted to find put how often that might have happened before it's been noticed on a train (some cases on here involve months or even years of wrongly applied discounts after Railcards expired and passengers forgot about it but still bought discounted tickets) - which the railway can then seek to recoup against threat of court action with no right of Appeal.

I'm not saying don't appeal, but a Penalty fare is often the least worst sanction that staff can issue, apart from a verbal ticking off.

Thanks for this. My daughter has made no train journeys, apart from the ones on Saturday for which she received the penalty fare notice, since purchasing the 16-25 railcard a few weeks ago, so I am not worried that they'll find other incorrect journeys.

 

[soil]

worth noting btw that the OP's child could be prosecuted, but not under the SJP, which is only for ages 18+.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thanks for this. My daughter has made no train journeys, apart from the ones on Saturday for which she received the penalty fare notice, since purchasing the 16-25 railcard a few weeks ago, so I am not worried that they'll find other incorrect journeys.

Yes, this is good - but the problem for being 'reported for investigation' is that even if they find no other travel errors, they know about the one incident, then charge a new ticket for that at the full Anytime rate fare - and add on a c£100 'admin fee' for the investigation and there is no alternative but to pay it if you don't want to go to court where a court fine and a criminal record is almost inevitable - unfortunately.

In contrast as you will appreciate a Penalty Fare dealt with for £50 starts to look like 'good value'....

But you'll get the help here you need to pursue this Appeal through all the stages if required and I do hope that will be successful.

 

[soil]

Yes, this is good - but the problem for being 'reported for investigation' is that even if they find no other travel errors, they know about the one incident, then charge a new ticket for that at the full Anytime rate fare - and add on a c£100 'admin fee' for the investigation and there is no alternative but to pay it if you don't want to go to court where a court fine and a criminal record is almost inevitable - unfortunately.

A criminal conviction, not a criminal record per se.

Given the complication of the passenger being a child, and this being dealt with in youth court, it is not entirely obvious that a conviction would be inevitable at all.

It is also clearly not in the public interest to prosecute children in such circumstances, although whether the TOC would pay heed to this part of their code might vary from TOC to TOC.

 

[jwinger1975]

Yes, this is good - but the problem for being 'reported for investigation' is that even if they find no other travel errors, they know about the one incident, then charge a new ticket for that at the full Anytime rate fare - and add on a c£100 'admin fee' for the investigation and there is no alternative but to pay it if you don't want to go to court where a court fine and a criminal record is almost inevitable - unfortunately.

In contrast as you will appreciate a Penalty Fare dealt with for £50 starts to look like 'good value'....

But you'll get the help here you need to pursue this Appeal through all the stages if required and I do hope that will be successful.

How would I know if she's been 'reported for investigation'? All she was given was the PFN.

 

[Haywain]

How would I know if she's been 'reported for investigation'?

She hasn't. There could be further investigation but that's not the same thing.

 

[WesternLancer]

A criminal conviction, not a criminal record per se.

Given the complication of the passenger being a child, and this being dealt with in youth court, it is not entirely obvious that a conviction would be inevitable at all.

It is also clearly not in the public interest to prosecute children in such circumstances, although whether the TOC would pay heed to this part of their code might vary from TOC to TOC.

Many thanks for correcting me and also for reminding me of the age issue.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Aug 2025 ==

How would I know if she's been 'reported for investigation'? All she was given was the PFN.

It's typically one or the other. I think usually if someone is reported for investigation then they should be given a slip of paper stating that by the staff - though I'm not sure this is a strict requirement. People typically get asked for their name and address and told by the member of staff that 'the railway company will write to them and they will have to pay the correct fare' which is kind of half the story....

But it's clear from your information in your post that this hasn't happened and the Penalty Fare route has been taken. I don't think you have any need to be concerned about any other process, and as you say you know this is a 'one off' so even if they did decide to look at purchase records they won't find anything anyway.