Appeal - Didn't realise I had to print a ticket

[fence]

I'd really appreciate some advice as I was issued with a penalty and have had two appeals turned down (both standard responses without acknowledging any of the points I made in the appeals).

In short, I regularly travel from Kings Langley to London Euston and always buy a ticket through the Trainline app before the journey starts.
It is all managed through the app and doesn't require a printed ticket.

Back in July, I had to go on to Waterloo, which involved a change onto the Underground at Euston.

I checked the app to see whether I could save time and buy a ticket directly and it did offer this option, I bought the ticket on the platform and saw an email from Trainline pop up titled 'Your Ticket Confirmation'.

The train pulled in and I got onto a carriage with several revenue protection staff.
One asked to see my ticket, so I opened the app and it turns out that I had to download the tickets before boarding.

I hadn't noticed any message earlier in the transaction saying that this would be necessary, nor would I have expected to have to do so given you never need to print tickets for the Kings Langley to Euston leg of the journey.

The Revenue officer was very apologetic and said it would likely be overturned on appeal but that she had to take my details as I couldn't produce a ticket (even though I had paid for one as apparently 'people claim refunds'). This didn't make a great deal of sense as I would still have had to print a ticket at Euston to get through the barriers.

I've explained the situation in both appeals and sent screenshots of transaction and history of purchase but have just received templates saying that the penalty is correct.

As I am on my third appeal, are there specific points I need to make to get it overturned?

Thanks.

 

[AlterEgo]

Essentially the penalty fare was issued because you didn't produce a ticket. That is entirely proper and the correct procedure; the penalty fare will not be overturned on these grounds. "I forgot", "this is harsh", " I made a mistake" are not grounds for appeal. Never ever believe any official who is issuing you with any form of penalty that you can just get it overturned if you only be quiet and comply now - why would they be issuing a penalty fare which they believed would not lawfully stand?

If you show us the Notice you were issued, though, with your details removed, it is possible you have a technical line of appeal. The Notice has to be filled in in a certain way with some mandatory information to be compliant; if the Notice is not complaint it will be overturned on appeal.

In future, be aware that any cross-London journey will involve a paper ticket you will need to collect, because London Underground (still!) cannot accept e-tickets. The ticket purchasing flow on any retailer will tell you this, as will the confirmation email.

 

[fence]

Thanks for your speedy response.

You are quite right that the obligation was on me to produce a ticket and I didn't.

My issue is that there was nothing that I could see in the purchase process on the app before payment to say that I would need to print the tickets and that I was stopped on a leg of the journey that doesn't require printed tickets if you are not doing an onward journey.

I was hoping some discretion would be applied given I provided proof that I had 'bought' the tickets prior to boarding and had a long history of traveling and paying for that route.

I don't have the original letter to hand so can't upload it, but will assume it is all correct and that they aren't going to say 'OK, next time pay more attention. We have your details and if we stop you again we won't let you off'.

Your point on the Revenue Inspectors claim is correct, but I assume they have targets to hit and aren't able to apply discretion. Again, it isn't a situation I've found myself in before, and I was trying to work out what had happened when the message came up that I didn't have a ticket.

Personally I feel their draconian approach is flawed and doesn't take human behaviour into account.

In the short term gets them their money, but it break the social contract of 'I pay and you get me from A to B' because I paid and you've fined me on top of that for a technicality that is down to your systems and processes not being consistent.

In the longer term, if passengers feel they have been harshly dealt with, many will try to recoup the money they feel has been taken from them by not buying tickets to make it up.

All that does is turn regular fare payers who made a mistake into fare evaders which should be the opposite of what they are trying to do.

Anyway, thanks again for your help.

 

[MotCO]

I don't have the original letter to hand so can't upload it, but will assume it is all correct and that they aren't going to say 'OK, next time pay more attention. We have your details and if we stop you again we won't let you off'.

Do you mean you no longer have the Penalty Fare document you were issued with, nor have a copy of it? That is unfortunate since in a small percentage of cases they are not correctly completed, meaning that the Penalty Fare is not valid.

 

[Adam Williams]

My issue is that there was nothing that I could see in the purchase process on the app before payment to say that I would need to print the tickets

It's indicated by the absence of the barcode ticket icon () on the search result cards, and at checkout-time.

 

[robbeech]

Never ever believe any official who is issuing you with any form of penalty that you can just get it overturned if you only be quiet and comply now - why would they be issuing a penalty fare which they believed would not lawfully stand?

This statement should be displayed on every gateline and on every platform.

That said, targets are a thing with some operators, even if unofficially despite what people might try to claim.

It's indicated by the absence of the barcode ticket icon (View attachment 187009) on the search result cards, and at checkout-time.

View attachment 187010

There’s a strong argument to suggest that the more normal e-tickets become (there must be some stats on this) the more these increasingly rare journeys where the railway has refused to keep up with technology should become subject to additional warnings upon purchase that the railway has let you down and will profit from doing so if you don’t pretend you’re in the 90s for a bit.

 

[Adam Williams]

There’s a strong argument to suggest that the more normal e-tickets become (there must be some stats on this) the more these increasingly rare journeys where the railway has refused to keep up with technology should become subject to additional warnings upon purchase that the railway has let you down and will profit from doing so if you don’t pretend you’re in the 90s for a bit.

I agree, the TrainSplit apps will use a yellow warning, a specific icon in the search results (rather than the absence of one) - and we've experimented with a dialog that completely interrupts the purchase flow on web and requires acknowledgement.

I think "some apps don't do enough given the shift in E-Ticket availability/penetration" is a reasonable criticism, but I just wanted to address OP's claim that it wasn't mentioned in the purchase flow at all.

 

[Watershed]

My issue is that there was nothing that I could see in the purchase process on the app before payment to say that I would need to print the tickets

This is what the Trainline app shows in the basket stage when you select a Kings Langley to Waterloo ticket:



It clearly states that you must collect your ticket from the station. Could it be more prominent? Perhaps so, but it is nevertheless telling you how you will receive your ticket. If you skimread past that bit, I'm not sure the app can necessarily be blamed for that.

I was stopped on a leg of the journey that doesn't require printed tickets if you are not doing an onward journey.

You must be in possession of your ticket before you board the train. That is the basic rule reinforced by the Penalty Fare warning signage at the station and the fact that eTickets are available for a different journey (that you were not making) does not change this.

I do have sympathy with you, but at the end of the day the information on the app and at the station will have told you the correct thing to do. Any appeal will therefore only succeed on technical legal grounds rather substantive ones.

 

[fandroid]

I know that the Forum's site makes it very obvious that the tickets for some selected journeys can only be fulfilled with paper tickets. I regularly make small changes to my plans to avoid the faff of collecting tickets and to be able to use e-tickets.

 

[Snow1964]

There’s a strong argument to suggest that the more normal e-tickets become (there must be some stats on this) the more these increasingly rare journeys where the railway has refused to keep up with technology should become subject to additional warnings upon purchase that the railway has let you down and will profit from doing so if you don’t pretend you’re in the 90s for a bit.

Yes, would also help in email when have to collect has different email header, specifically not ticket confirmation, but something like details on collecting your rail ticket before travel.

Computerised emails often contain lots of info, and putting the difference from normal way down in the email is not going to help anyone notice it until they open it and read it fully after a problem.

 

[fence]

Do you mean you no longer have the Penalty Fare document you were issued with, nor have a copy of it? That is unfortunate since in a small percentage of cases they are not correctly completed, meaning that the Penalty Fare is not valid.

Yes, unfortunately I've come back from holiday and can't find it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2025 ==

This is what the Trainline app shows in the basket stage when you select a Kings Langley to Waterloo ticket:

View attachment 187008

It clearly states that you must collect your ticket from the station. Could it be more prominent? Perhaps so, but it is nevertheless telling you how you will receive your ticket. If you skimread past that bit, I'm not sure the app can necessarily be blamed for that.


You must be in possession of your ticket before you board the train. That is the basic rule reinforced by the Penalty Fare warning signage at the station and the fact that eTickets are available for a different journey (that you were not making) does not change this.

I do have sympathy with you, but at the end of the day the information on the app and at the station will have told you the correct thing to do. Any appeal will therefore only succeed on technical legal grounds rather substantive ones.

Yes, it shows it half way down the page.

The user will be checking the journey details which is what matters to them and the payment details which are required to complete the purchase.

Sticking an important message like that halfway down without drawing attention to it or requiring any acknowledgement of it seems like a pretty good way for them to cover themselves legally and put the blame on the user.

What I found inconsistent is that I needed a printed ticket for the Kings Langley to London Euston leg when you don't need one if that is your final destination.

I thought I was saving time by booking the whole journey in one go and as I don't often take the train beyond the commute, I wasn't looking for extra information halfway down the purchase page.

Like I say, they get their money, but the social contract is broken.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The best "muscle memory" way to avoid this is always to add the ticket to your phone's wallet immediately as you buy it. You will then immediately notice this as you won't be able to do so. It'll also make your life easier at inspection time.

 

[John R]

Not of any help with the situation the OP is in (of which I have considerable sympathy), but if I am making a journey beyond a London terminus then I wouldn't think of buying a through ticket simply to reach another terminus, but would simply use contactless or Oyster for the tube element. (Oyster in my case as I have a railcard linked to it.)

 

[fence]

Just looked at the payment options when I went to pay the penalty and they include the fare of the journey, even though I've already paid for that.

Frankly I think that is outrageous and won't be an error as I've already submitted proof of payment and a history of travel in my earlier appeals.

So now, I am paying a penalty and for the journey twice because I didn't print a ticket for a journey that doesn't require a ticket if you aren't travelling beyond Euston.

 

[cholsey-choose]

It clearly states that you must collect your ticket from the station. Could it be more prominent? Perhaps so, but it is nevertheless telling you how you will receive your ticket. If you skimread past that bit, I'm not sure the app can necessarily be blamed for that.

I am not normally very sympathetic, but here I think OP has been unlucky. There could easily be a sentence here saying "you must collect paper tickets; e-tickets are not valid".

 

[swt_passenger]

So now, I am paying a penalty and for the journey twice because I didn't print a ticket for a journey that doesn't require a ticket if you aren't travelling beyond Euston.

Wouldn‘t you be able to refund the original ticket if you never picked it up? Or have you subsequently printed it?

 

[Idiotic]

You were / still maybe eligible for a refund of the original ticket. Go to your bookings and request a refund. See if that works.

 

[furlong]

Frankly I think that is outrageous and won't be an error as I've already submitted proof of payment and a history of travel in my earlier appeals.

You should make that final appeal, making this one of your key arguments - that Penalty Fares can't have been intended to cover situations such as yours or else they'd have made an allowance for this in the regulations as it would be perverse for regulations to require anyone to pay the fare twice - separate from any element of penalty!

You'll need to do a 'compelling reasons' appeal under 16(3)(d).

Read the ORR's recent report and throw in some quotes.
Independent review of train operators’ revenue protection practices

This exact situation is mentioned (3.79). (See also 4.44, page 10 para 32 and many more.)

 

[fence]

Wouldn‘t you be able to refund the original ticket if you never picked it up? Or have you subsequently printed it?

I had to print it at Euston to get through the barriers to the Underground. I think the tickets for all legs of the journey printed out.

Pretty scandalous really,

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't have the original letter to hand so can't upload it, but will assume it is all correct

That's a big assumption. Notices are more complex than they seem, and they need to be filled in meticulously and in line with the Penalty Fares Regulations. They are often noncompliant. I encourage you to try to find it and post it here so it can be scrutinised for a line of appeal which will be lawful.

and that they aren't going to say 'OK, next time pay more attention. We have your details and if we stop you again we won't let you off'.

If the appeal is successful they say "we have accepted your appeal" and that is that.

Your point on the Revenue Inspectors claim is correct, but I assume they have targets to hit and aren't able to apply discretion.

They are able to apply discretion. They could have sold you a new ticket, or asked you to leave, or directed you to print your ticket at the destination. They chose to penalty fare you because it was a lawful decision they could make, and they used their discretion to decide to do so.

Personally I feel their draconian approach is flawed and doesn't take human behaviour into account.

In the short term gets them their money, but it break the social contract of 'I pay and you get me from A to B' because I paid and you've fined me on top of that for a technicality that is down to your systems and processes not being consistent.

The social contract also involves you taking some ownership and realising you have to show a ticket. There are a *lot* of people who refund uncollected tickets - you can see plenty of people in this area of the forum who are in trouble for doing exactly that. Penalty fares are a way of disposing of low level offences without investigating one's state of mind; they are a blunt tool, like speeding tickets or parking charges, which don't take our intentions into account.

Just looked at the payment options when I went to pay the penalty and they include the fare of the journey, even though I've already paid for that.

Frankly I think that is outrageous and won't be an error as I've already submitted proof of payment and a history of travel in my earlier appeals.

So now, I am paying a penalty and for the journey twice because I didn't print a ticket for a journey that doesn't require a ticket if you aren't travelling beyond Euston.

A penalty fare is £100/50 (prompt payment) plus the applicable fare for the journey. The whole point is a passenger who does not produce a ticket is liable for the fare due.

 

[Hadders]

This soinds like an unfortunate incident.

The difficulty for train companies is that there are many examples of people collecting the ticket and giving it to a friend, and then the purchaser travels using the email confirmation saying they didn't realise they had to print off the ticket. I'm not saying that this is what happened in this case but there is something that has to be considered when deciding how these sort of things should be dealt with. It's a bit like getting a aprking ticket or being caught speeding - incredibly frustrating and a bit expensive.

Legally speaking, the train company could prosecute you for not possessing a valid ticket. Instead they have issued a Penalty Fare which is a higher than normal fare which are often issued to people who have made 'honest mistakes'. A Penalty Fare is £100 plus the appropriate fare reduced to £50 pus the appropriate fare if paid within 21-days.

It is always worth appealing and @furlong makes a valid point, although ordinarily I wouldn't expect an appeal to succeed. It is a shame you've no longer got the Penalty Fare paperwork you were given because there might be some very technical reasons why it might be invalid. Forum members will be able to advise if this is the case if you can find an upload an anonymised copy of the paperwork.

 

[gray1404]

As requested up thread if we are going to try to find a successful ground for your third and final appeal then you will need to upload a copy of the notice you were issued on the day.

 

[fence]

Not of any help with the situation the OP is in (of which I have considerable sympathy), but if I am making a journey beyond a London terminus then I wouldn't think of buying a through ticket simply to reach another terminus, but would simply use contactless or Oyster for the tube element. (Oyster in my case as I have a railcard linked to it.)

Yep, that's what I would have done normally.

But that leads to having to do two expenses forms and I was trying to save time.

Clearly, I have neither saved time nor money, so lesson learnt!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2025 ==

This soinds like an unfortunate incident.

The difficulty for train companies is that there are many examples of people collecting the ticket and giving it to a friend, and then the purchaser travels using the email confirmation saying they didn't realise they had to print off the ticket. I'm not saying that this is what happened in this case but there is something that has to be considered when deciding how these sort of things should be dealt with. It's a bit like getting a aprking ticket or being caught speeding - incredibly frustrating and a bit expensive.

Legally speaking, the train company could prosecute you for not possessing a valid ticket. Instead they have issued a Penalty Fare which is a higher than normal fare which are often issued to people who have made 'honest mistakes'. A Penalty Fare is £100 plus the appropriate fare reduced to £50 pus the appropriate fare if paid within 21-days.

It is always worth appealing and @furlong makes a valid point, although ordinarily I wouldn't expect an appeal to succeed. It is a shame you've no longer got the Penalty Fare paperwork you were given because there might be some very technical reasons why it might be invalid. Forum members will be able to advise if this is the case if you can find an upload an anonymised copy of the paperwork.

Yeah, fair point, I'm sure that there are plenty who don't pay for their tickets and that doesn't help.

Though in my instance I would have had to print it off to get through the Tube barrier, so wouldn't have been able to share it with anyone.

Either way, they had plenty of evidence that it was an honest mistake, not helped by their inconsistent requirements influenced by the end destination, not the actual train you are on and the lack of clear information in the purchase process.

They could have exercised discretion and said 'we've got your details now so if we catch you again, we aren't letting you off next time.

Instead they chose to take the money and turn our relationship from one where I pay whether the barriers are open or not and whether there are revenue protection agents visible or not and they get me from A to B with a bit of a delay, to one where we try and get one over on each other if we can.

Just feels like a bit of a shame and a bit short sighted if this is their standard response and is repeated at scale.
There will be plenty of 'honest' people who feel wronged and decide to evade fares in future to get their own back, while regular fare evaders probably won't change their ways.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2025 ==

As requested up thread if we are going to try to find a successful ground for your third and final appeal then you will need to upload a copy of the notice you were issued on the day.

I appreciate the offer, unfortunately I was away and unable to respond to their second appeal rejection and had to either submit a third appeal today or pay and I don't know where the notice is.

 

[furlong]

So get that third appeal in before the deadline. Nothing to lose. As above, mention it's on the grounds of 'compelling reasons' (you must use those two words) and set out what those reasons are as you already did. Any appeal is better than no appeal, because there are still further steps available after a failed third appeal that are more difficult if you give up after two.

(If you already paid, you can still appeal as well - if you win you get money back.)

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't know what your want us to do other than read your penalty fare catharsis and your new found purpose as the South WCML Blade Runner. However I urge you to be a little more circumspect - even you cannot see the gaping revenue risk in a passenger not collecting their paper ticket when making a trip entering London's contactless zone (I rate that fare evasion strategy as three chillies out of five on the spicy/clever scale), so I think a life of fare evasion might not be for you.

We can't see the notice so we can't help you; I'm afraid seeing it is sort of the minimum requirement for us to start examining if it was issued lawfully or not. It is of no consequence whether you or I think it was fair; all that matters is it was issued in line with the Regulations. Making a third appeal as @furlong suggests will be almost certainly unsuccessful, but it will buy you some time to pay the notice and stop it escalating for the time it is being considered. Yes, the railway is full of BS and it is frequently customer-unfriendly - but our purpose here is to try and give raw and accurate advice.

 

[fence]

So get that third appeal in before the deadline. Nothing to lose. As above, mention it's on the grounds of 'compelling reasons' (you must use those two words) and set out what those reasons are as you already did. Any appeal is better than no appeal, because there are still further steps available after a failed third appeal that are more difficult if you give up after two.

(If you already paid, you can still appeal as well - if you win you get money back.)

I've appealed again, so let's see what they say.

I saw that 24% of appeals are accepted in the first round, so slightly peeved that mine wasn't, particularly as the links you shared mention 'discretion (none has been shown), loss to the industry (I'd paid for my tickets before boarding and collected them at Euston to get through the barriers) and intent (I boarded a carriage clearly teeming with Revenue Officers!).

I don't know what your want us to do other than read your penalty fare catharsis and your new found purpose as the South WCML Blade Runner. However I urge you to be a little more circumspect - even you cannot see the gaping revenue risk in a passenger not collecting their paper ticket when making a trip entering London's contactless zone (I rate that fare evasion strategy as three chillies out of five on the spicy/clever scale), so I think a life of fare evasion might not be for you.

We can't see the notice so we can't help you; I'm afraid seeing it is sort of the minimum requirement for us to start examining if it was issued lawfully or not. It is of no consequence whether you or I think it was fair; all that matters is it was issued in line with the Regulations. Making a third appeal as @furlong suggests will be almost certainly unsuccessful, but it will buy you some time to pay the notice and stop it escalating for the time it is being considered. Yes, the railway is full of BS and it is frequently customer-unfriendly - but our purpose here is to try and give raw and accurate advice.

I was just after some advice really as it seemed unfair in the circumstances and I was surprised that none of the points I had made in my appeals had been addressed and instead I'd received a 'computer says no' response.

Not sure what you mean by my purpose as Blade Runner, but rest assured I'm not going to embark on a life of dodging fares.

In my case, I'd have needed the printed ticket to get from the platform into Euston as the app wouldn't have had the barcode so there wasn't really a revenue risk and I am in no state to start jumping barriers.

That said, this thread has opened my eyes on how bad and open to abuse the system is!

In any case, I don't want you to do anything other than get a good nights sleep!

 

[furlong]

Making a third appeal as @furlong suggests will be almost certainly unsuccessfu

A case like the current one is however exactly the sort of situation for which the appeals system was created. The appeals panel can look at all the evidence in the round and make its decision as to whether or not it thinks there was likely to have been an attempt at fare evasion and thus the penalty is warranted.

If the train companies were doing their jobs properly, there would be none of the successful technical appeals that we see so often here because train companies would only be issuing PFs in line with the regulations and an appeals system would be redundant if it weren't for what are now termed "compelling reasons". (You shouldn't need a 3-tier appeals system just to deal with arguments that a PF wasn't issued in line with the regulations!)

(One outcome of the ORR review will hopefully be to reiterate that a broad interpretation of that term is expected.)

 

[jon0844]

I agree, the TrainSplit apps will use a yellow warning, a specific icon in the search results (rather than the absence of one) - and we've experimented with a dialog that completely interrupts the purchase flow on web and requires acknowledgement.

I think "some apps don't do enough given the shift in E-Ticket availability/penetration" is a reasonable criticism, but I just wanted to address OP's claim that it wasn't mentioned in the purchase flow at all.

It really shouldn't be hard for Trainline to make some things clearer when people are likely booking train tickets regularly and so, after a while, may not notice things they keep seeing.

If they always get a barcode ticket, it may not be immediately obvious that all of a sudden there's a requirement to print (because of a cross London journey). Just as it wouldn't be unreasonable for Trainline to double check, or make it clear, a railcard discount is being applied because it was before.

Even having a voluntary alert to remind of a railcard coming up for renewal (including for tickets purchased in advance when the current railcard may have expired) would all be valuable things that the company doesn't have to do, but should (IMO) do.

We must remember that on a mobile device, things can easily be hidden for simple things like having a smaller display (yes, some people don't have phones with 7-inch displays!) or certain accessibility features on, including larger text sizes or different screen densities.

 

[AlterEgo]

A case like the current one is however exactly the sort of situation for which the appeals system was created. The appeals panel can look at all the evidence in the round and make its decision as to whether or not it thinks there was likely to have been an attempt at fare evasion and thus the penalty is warranted.

We all know it doesn't work like that though. It should, but it doesn't. Penalty Fares seem much less easy to appeal based on "compelling reasons" than parking penalty charges in my view.

(You shouldn't need a 3-tier appeals system just to deal with arguments that a PF wasn't issued in line with the regulations!)

Well, quite!

 

[Paul AC]

Presumably the same problem could occur if you booked online a through ticket to one of the Merseyrail stations (let's say Manchester to Birkenhead Hamilton Square). Due to the inability of the Merseyrail ticket barriers to accept e-tickets, such a ticket must always be a CCST and collected at a station. However you might not notice this when booking if the "collect at station" requirement isn't very clear. There are so many journeys nowadays that you can make with e-tickets that you might not be aware of the few that can't be; and this makes them a special case that needs special attention.