ScotRail to introduce £10 minimum fare for those not buying before boarding

[AlterEgo]

I'm not the only one unconvinced by this, it seems... https://x.com/seatsixtyone

View attachment 198632
[Description of image: The Man in Seat 61 replies to Rail Magazine's article on the ScotRail £10 minimum fare as follows: "That's a financial penalty, so is by definition a Penalty Fare 1993 Railways Act). So this needs to be fully compliant with the Penalty Fare Rules"]

Disagree. It's even less a financial penalty than only selling Anytimes or undiscounted tickets on board, something which has been around for a lot longer and which can result in premiums of £100 or more.

 

[najaB]

I'm not the only one unconvinced by this, it seems...

I disagree. A penalty fare is, by definition, the fare due for the journey plus a fixed charge.

As suggested above: where the ticket price is less than £10 set the Anytime ticket to £10, set TVMs to sell the Off-Peak ticket and have ticket examiners/guards sell the Anytime ticket on board. Nobody is being penalised (unless there was no working TVM, in which case the Guard/TE can sell the Off-Peak).

 

[kkong]

A penalty fare is, by definition, the fare due for the journey plus a fixed charge.

This has only been the case (in England) since The Railways (Penalty Fares) (Amendment) Regulations 2022 came into force.

Previously it was "£20 or twice the full single fare applicable, whichever is greater."

 

[redreni]

OK, so you get on an Avanti at Preston (ungated) and go to Euston and are sold an Anytime at £198 rather than an Off Peak at £70 because you didn't pay before you boarded. An extra £128, not under a tenner.

Why does that not have to be fully compliant with the Penalty Fares Rules? It isn't. And it's been how it's worked for years including back into BR days.

Disagree. It's even less a financial penalty than only selling Anytimes or undiscounted tickets on board, something which has been around for a lot longer and which can result in premiums of £100 or more.

Being around for a long time and being legitimate are not necessarily the same thing, though. I quite agree those are financial penalties as well and should also be subject to the same checks, balances and safeguards as penalty fares.

 

[Oxfordblues]

Down here in Oxford we still have a staffed booking office and when that's closed ticket machines which cater for all railcards and entitlements, with one exception: BR Staff Travel and FIP cards issued by other administrations. So if for example an SNCF employee wants to buy a ticket with a 75% reduction outside office hours they would need to board their train and approach the train manager in the hope of securing the necessary travel document. It's not fare evasion and doesn't deserve a penalty.

 

[AlterEgo]

Down here in Oxford we still have a staffed booking office and when that's closed ticket machines which cater for all railcards and entitlements, with one exception: BR Staff Travel and FIP cards issued by other administrations.

A bold claim! Almost certainly untrue.

Does it, for example, issue the appropriate discounts for wheelchair users and carers who do not hold a Disabled Railcard? https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/tick...romotions/wheelchair-user-without-a-railcard/

(note that some discounts there exceed the Disabled Railcard ones!)

There will be a dozen other things it can't do too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Feb 2026 ==

Being around for a long time and being legitimate are not necessarily the same thing, though. I quite agree those are financial penalties as well and should also be subject to the same checks, balances and safeguards as penalty fares.

Is that a legal opinion?

 

[redreni]

Is that a legal opinion?

Certainly not! Not everything that is illegitimate in the opinion of some people, is unlawful.

But selling somebody a more expensive ticket than they need as a form of punishment for not buying before boarding is, by any reasonable interpretation of the word, a penalty. I believe that if you want to impose a penalty, you'd better make sure it was possible for the passenger to buy the ticket they required before boarding, at the station, and you'd better make sure there were prominent signs warning them there is a penalty if you board without paying first. All the sorts of things that are stipulated in the Penalty Fares Regs, in fact.

As you say (though you carefully call it a 'premium' rather than a penalty), we could be talking hundreds of pounds extra in some cases.

 

[Flying_Turtle]

Down here in Oxford we still have a staffed booking office and when that's closed ticket machines which cater for all railcards and entitlements, with one exception: BR Staff Travel and FIP cards issued by other administrations. So if for example an SNCF employee wants to buy a ticket with a 75% reduction outside office hours they would need to board their train and approach the train manager in the hope of securing the necessary travel document. It's not fare evasion and doesn't deserve a penalty.

And that is what worries me... In my case the fips entitle to 50% (which I could obtain by buying a child ticket) but I am not a child am I? So, I always must board without a ticket if no ticket office is available.
Plus, there is the struggle that many staff in Scotrail don t seem to be able to locate the FIP fares on their portable machines...

 

[Bletchleyite]

And that is what worries me... In my case the fips entitle to 50% (which I could obtain by buying a child ticket) but I am not a child am I? So, I always must board without a ticket if no ticket office is available.
Plus, there is the struggle that many staff in Scotrail don t seem to be able to locate the FIP fares on their portable machines...

I'm not sure why this is any different from how it is in England now except you're only risking a tenner, not a PF or prosecution? If you can't buy the required ticket or use the required payment method you just board and get sold one on board or at your destination.

 

[Wolfie]

Down here in Oxford we still have a staffed booking office and when that's closed ticket machines which cater for all railcards and entitlements, with one exception: BR Staff Travel and FIP cards issued by other administrations. So if for example an SNCF employee wants to buy a ticket with a 75% reduction outside office hours they would need to board their train and approach the train manager in the hope of securing the necessary travel document. It's not fare evasion and doesn't deserve a penalty.

I've never seen a TVM that sells Plusbus.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've never seen a TVM that sells Plusbus.

Of course that's not really relevant to whether you can board a train or not.

Can't imagine many are sold at the moment with the 3 quid thing going on...

 

[najaB]

Can't imagine many are sold at the moment with the 3 quid thing going on...

Not that that is relevant in this case since it doesn't apply in Scotland.

But selling somebody a more expensive ticket than they need as a form of punishment for not buying before boarding is, by any reasonable interpretation of the word, a penalty.

I might agree if it was a punishment, but what is proposed is a minimum fare for tickets bought on board. Cheaper tickets are available if bought before boarding, or if you're unable to purchase before boarding.

This is not a new principle and applies to other transport systems both north and south of the border.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Indeed, it should really be an amendment to the NRCoT along the lines of "an operator may, if you do not buy your ticket before you board, be entitled to charge you an additional surcharge to the appropriate fare onboard. This will not exceed £10."

The concept of the NRCoT pre-dates devolution, but trying to maintain one document valid across different countries with their own legal systems is getting increasingly complex, so may need looking at.

In which case, in the rest of Britain, why weren't penalty fares called 'minimum fares' to dispense with all the pesky requirements to pass regulations, then?

You're still charging people more than the published fare. That's a penalty.

Because Scotland is a devolved nation with it's own laws, parliament, and rail fares. It shouldn't automatically follow that what they do is what England and Wales does.

 

[scottishtrains]

First Aberdeen have a £50 "Standard Fare" for those without a valid ticket (I doubt anyone has been charged this, ever) in their Conditions of Travel:

I've only ever seen this charged once during the summer

 

[Rab Smith]

Never mind the usual flirting around the issue, get it in law. It's a Government run company now and as such, there should be severe penalties for fare evasion. Too many self entitled goons now think that they not only don't have to pay for things, they think it's their right to get it for free.
We've created this Society and it's time to start cracking down on it.

 

[scottishtrains]

Never mind the usual flirting around the issue, get it in law. It's a Government run company now and as such, there should be severe penalties for fare evasion. Too many self entitled goons now think that they not only don't have to pay for things, they think it's their right to get it for free.
We've created this Society and it's time to start cracking down on it.

Define when a penalty would be issued for fare evasion then please, would this count if you boarded at a station with a TVM but a NEC card (young scot discount), or what if its unmanned, or what if youre paying cash? Would you still issue a fare evasion penalty?

 

[Kite159]

I've only ever seen this charged once during the summer

I guess comes into play if someone attempts to "short fare" on a bus. Boards in Aberdeen city centre, asking for a ticket for somewhere within the city suburbs but stays on outside the city area where the fare would be more?

Of course that's not really relevant to whether you can board a train or not.

Can't imagine many are sold at the moment with the 3 quid thing going on...

Considering it's only £3 for a single, in some areas a plusbus ticket pays for itself if you are using 2 buses.

 

[scottishtrains]

I guess comes into play if someone attempts to "short fare" on a bus. Boards in Aberdeen city centre, asking for a ticket for somewhere within the city suburbs but stays on outside the city area where the fare would be more

If I remember right it was someone bought it using a student ID discount and forgot to carry it, therefore making the ticket invalid

 

[Rab Smith]

Define when a penalty would be issued for fare evasion then please, would this count if you boarded at a station with a TVM but a NEC card (young scot discount), or what if its unmanned, or what if youre paying cash? Would you still issue a fare evasion penalty?

A penalty for obvious fare evasion. The technology is there now to determine whether someone has boarded a train ticketless. If the TVM is not operating or down, that can be conveyed to the guard via technology.
We're talking here of self entitled users who can but will not buy a ticket to travel.
So for instance, a person joins the train at a Station where ticket issuing facilities are available ticketless, an automatic penalty fare is issued. It would then be up to the individual to appeal if the ticket issuing process had broken down.
It's not difficult.

 

[AlterEgo]

A penalty for obvious fare evasion. The technology is there now to determine whether someone has boarded a train ticketless. If the TVM is not operating or down, that can be conveyed to the guard via technology.
We're talking here of self entitled users who can but will not buy a ticket to travel.
So for instance, a person joins the train at a Station where ticket issuing facilities are available ticketless, an automatic penalty fare is issued. It would then be up to the individual to appeal if the ticket issuing process had broken down.
It's not difficult.

That doesn't answer the question you were asked, to be fair.

 

[scottishtrains]

So for instance, a person joins the train at a Station where ticket issuing facilities are available ticketless, an automatic penalty fare is issued. It would then be up to the individual to appeal if the ticket issuing process had broken down.

what if they were wanting to use there railcard etc as a discount? would the penalty fare then be void?

 

[Wolfie]

Of course that's not really relevant to whether you can board a train or not.

Can't imagine many are sold at the moment with the 3 quid thing going on...

Telford PlusBus with a Railcard is £2.75...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Feb 2026 ==

The concept of the NRCoT pre-dates devolution, but trying to maintain one document valid across different countries with their own legal systems is getting increasingly complex, so may need looking at.

Because Scotland is a devolved nation with it's own laws, parliament, and rail fares. It shouldn't automatically follow that what they do is what England and Wales does.

Agreed but cross-border trains become problematic if so.

 

[Rab Smith]

That doesn't answer the question you were asked, to be fair.

Does it not? The question being about a specific ticket would still be a decision for the guard to issue a penalty fare if he/she had information the TVM was down or not.
It's getting away from the main problem of ticketless travel. That is a direct action by an individual to not pay for travel when there is plenty opportunity for them to buy a ticket.
If the ticket issuing facilities are down then it can be dealt with under appeal, just like it is in England.

 

[njamescouk]

Sell tickets on trains, problem solved. If the revenue from tickets doesn't cover the wage of the ticket collector stop stressing about it.

 

[Adam Williams]

If the TVM is not operating or down, that can be conveyed to the guard via technology.

It is foolish to assume that all failure cases can always be remotely detected like this. What if the touchscreen digitiser fails in a way the software can't detect? There might be a drop in sales, but that might be the only indicator you get.

 

[AlterEgo]

Does it not? The question being about a specific ticket would still be a decision for the guard to issue a penalty fare if he/she had information the TVM was down or not.

No, it doesn't. Go back and read the question you were asked, and then answer it directly. Would that apply in those cases, or not?

 

[hexagon789]

Define when a penalty would be issued for fare evasion then please, would this count if you boarded at a station with a TVM but a NEC card (young scot discount), or what if its unmanned, or what if youre paying cash? Would you still issue a fare evasion penalty?

ScotRail have detailed exclusions to the £10 charge:


'- For customers who hold a national entitlement card.

- If a ticket office in a station is closed.

- If a station doesn’t have a ticket office or ticket vending machine (TVM).

- If a customer has a registered disability that prevents them from using TVMs.

- Staff will have the discretion to issue the minimum fare depending on the customer’s circumstances.

- Customers who can only pay with cash would obtain a ‘promise to pay’ ticket from a TVM and then purchase a ticket from on train staff.'

 

[scottishtrains]

- Customers who can only pay with cash would obtain a ‘promise to pay’ ticket from a TVM and then purchase a ticket from on train staff.'

what if there was a fault with the TVM and the ticket office was closed or station is unmanned? do we know that the protocol is then

 

[hexagon789]

what if there was a fault with the TVM and the ticket office was closed or station is unmanned? do we know that the protocol is then

If there's no opportunity to buy your relevant ticket before boarding, then the default is to buy on board.

Certainly that is the position outlined in the National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT):

'Where it is possible to do so, you must purchase or hold a valid Ticket for your full intended
journey before boarding a train to travel on any service provided by the Train Companies.'

Key phrase being - "where it is possible".

 

[redreni]

The concept of the NRCoT pre-dates devolution, but trying to maintain one document valid across different countries with their own legal systems is getting increasingly complex, so may need looking at.

Because Scotland is a devolved nation with it's own laws, parliament, and rail fares. It shouldn't automatically follow that what they do is what England and Wales does.

But GB has one rail network and a lot of journeys are cross-border.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not hostile to either devolution or full independence. In fact, I'm rather more open to it than the SNP seems to be, at times. I don't, for example, think London should have a veto.

But even if there were two separate countries it would still be the case that, as with the island of Ireland, there would be one rail network. It's hard enough for people to know and adhere to the rules when you have one set of T&Cs, let alone if you start being different for different's sake.

The rules are clear everywhere else. Buy before you board if there are facilities at the station where you board to buy the ticket you require, unless those facilities don't accept your only available form of payment. If you don't, there's a range of options available to TOCs to deal with the fact you've travelled without a ticket, one of which isn't to make up a hitherto non-existent fare outside of the simplified Anytime / Off-peak / Advance range.