Penalty fare appeal advice Brondesbury park

[sky]

Hi everyone,

I wanted to get some advice about a situation I’m dealing with on my train journey recently.
That morning, I travelled from Watford junction to West Hampstead, then took the Overground from West Hampstead to Brondesbury park . From Brondesbury park, I continued my journey towards Finchley Road & Frognal.

At Brondesbury park I completely forgot to tap in. The station layout caught me off guard — the card readers were on the side rather than the usual barrier-style gates I’m used to. I’ve only recently moved to the UK, so I’m still getting familiar with how everything works, and this was genuinely just an oversight on my part.

I received a £50 penalty, which I appealed, explaining the situation in full. I also provided my full two-month Oyster/contactless journey history to show that I regularly pay correctly and that there was no intention to avoid paying. Unfortunately, my appeal was rejected.

What I don’t really understand is why the penalty is so high. I would have expected the system to just charge me the maximum fare automatically if I didn’t tap in, rather than issuing a penalty fare.

I want to stress that there was absolutely no intention to cheat the system — it was just a genuine mistake due to the station layout being different from what I’m used to and I visited the station the first time.

Do you think it’s worth pursuing a second appeal, or is it unlikely to change the outcome? Has anyone been in a similar situation?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

 

[Crithylum]

Was this one journey or multiple? The locations don’t make sense if this is a single journey.

 

[SECR 65]

Was the penalty fare issued by a human, or by the system?

In some cases the advice given on here is that the 3rd appeal is more likely to succeed than the first and second, but I'm not sure if that applies in your case. Unfortunately, sometimes there is little scope for appeal when, technically, you have travelled without a valid ticket. Not sure, though.

If you are able to upload any documentation you have recieved, with personal details redacted, then the experts may be able to find an error with the paperwork and hence a solid grounds to appeal.

 

[sky]

Was the penalty fare issued by a human, or by the system?

In some cases the advice given on here is that the 3rd appeal is more likely to succeed than the first and second, but I'm not sure if that applies in your case. Unfortunately, sometimes there is little scope for appeal when, technically, you have travelled without a valid ticket. Not sure, though.

If you are able to upload any documentation you have recieved, with personal details redacted, then the experts may be able to find an error with the paperwork and hence a solid grounds to appeal.

Was the penalty fare issued by a human, or by the system?

In some cases the advice given on here is that the 3rd appeal is more likely to succeed than the first and second, but I'm not sure if that applies in your case. Unfortunately, sometimes there is little scope for appeal when, technically, you have travelled without a valid ticket. Not sure, though.

If you are able to upload any documentation you have recieved, with personal details redacted, then the experts may be able to find an error with the paperwork and hence a solid grounds to appeal.

It was done by a human. I tried to tell her that it was an over sign because the way the tap in machine it…even went on my TfL account and showed her my journey history since morning.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Apr 2026 ==

Was this one journey or multiple? The locations don’t make sense if this is a

Was this one journey or multiple? The locations don’t make sense if this is a single journey.

it was a single journey at the point where the issue happened. I was going back to Watford to took the train out again from (Brondesbury Park to Finchley Road & Frognal).

However, earlier that morning I had made other journeys (Watford → West Hampstead → Brondesbury Park), so overall it was part of a longer morning of travel.

 

[Crithylum]

I still don’t understand why you would travel from Bondesbury Park to Finchley Road and Frognal to go to Watford Junction. It is the other direction. Unless you are maybe confusing Watford and Watford Junction. Where were you when you were given the PF?

Others will be around soon to check if there is a technicality to appeal with, but this is the sort of situation penalty fares are intended to deal with (the alternative is a report for prosecution). The reason for the increased fare is to prevent people paying when challenged, otherwise they get a free ride if there isn’t a ticket inspection.

 

[sky]

I still don’t understand why you would travel from Bondesbury Park to Finchley Road and Frognal to go to Watford Junction. It is the other direction. Unless you are maybe confusing Watford and Watford Junction. Where were you when you were given the PF?

Others will be around soon to check if there is a technicality to appeal with, but this is the sort of situation penalty fares are intended to deal with (the alternative is a report for prosecution). The reason for the increased fare is to prevent people paying when challenged, otherwise they get a free ride if there isn’t a

Sorry, I think I explained that poorly earlier.

I was heading towards the Metropolitan line at Finchley Road to get to Watford. So I travelled from Brondesbury Park to Finchley Road & Frognal, then planned to walk over to Finchley Road station to continue on the Metropolitan line.

I had just boarded the train at Brondesbury Park when a ticket inspector scanned my Oyster. That’s when I realised I hadn’t tapped in — mainly because the readers there aren’t the usual barrier gates, which I’m still getting used to.

The inspector got off with me at Finchley Road & Frognal (which is only about three stops from Brondesbury Park)and issued the penalty ticket .

Thanks for helping me figure this out — I really appreciate your time and advice

 

[Haywain]

I had just boarded the train at Brondesbury Park when a ticket inspector scanned my Oyster. That’s when I realised I hadn’t tapped in — mainly because the readers there aren’t the usual barrier gates, which I’m still getting used to.

The inspector got off with me at Finchley Road & Frognal (which is only about three stops from Brondesbury Park)and issued the penalty ticket

Issuing a Penalty Fare Notice is an appropriate course of action when someone hasn't touched in. Previous journeys have nothing to do with it. You have the right to appeal but I don't think you have any reason to hold out high hopes of success in doing so.

As an aside, it would have been easier to walk a hundred yards or so from Brondesbury to board the underground at Kilburn station and change at Wembley Park to get to Watford.

 

[sky]

Issuing a Penalty Fare Notice is an appropriate course of action when someone hasn't touched in. Previous journeys have nothing to do with it. You have the right to appeal but I don't think you have any reason to hold out high hopes of success in doing so.

As an aside, it would have been easier to walk a hundred yards or so from Brondesbury to board the underground station Kilburn station and change at Wembley Park to

Hey! Thanks for taking the time and for your honest feedback.

Looking back, I probably would have just walked to Kilburn and avoided Brondesbury Park altogether. However, I’m not local, and neither Google Maps nor TfL suggested that option to me at the time.

 

[furlong]

You said there were earlier journeys that day.
What were they all and what was the total deduction?
What further journeys were made that day?
What was the total spend at the end of the day?
Were any spending caps reached?
(In other words, if this problematic journey had not been paid for, would the total amount you paid that day have been the same or less?)

 

[island]

You said there were earlier journeys that day.
What were they all and what was the total deduction?
What further journeys were made that day?
What was the total spend at the end of the day?
Were any spending caps reached?
(In other words, if this problematic journey had not been paid for, would the total amount you paid that day have been the same or less?)

Nothing turns on any of these matters. Even if a cap is or will be reached, when using pay as you go it's a requirement to validate an Oyster card at the start and end of a journey in order to have a valid ticket.

 

[furlong]

Nothing turns on any of these matters. Even if a cap is or will be reached, when using pay as you go it's a requirement to validate an Oyster card at the start and end of a journey in order to have a valid ticket.

It feeds into the public interest test, which TfL does carry out. The question is not, is there sufficient evidence to prove in court that an offence was committed, but, considering all the circumstances, is prosecution the appropriate remedy. Equally, on conviction, it may provide mitigation, if the offender made no financial gain.

And in the PF appeals process, the people deciding the appeal are free to take into account the lack of a financial motive if they wish, and conclude it was a simple mistake not requiring a penalty.

 

[AlterEgo]

It feeds into the public interest test, which TfL does carry out. The question is not, is there sufficient evidence to prove in court that an offence was committed, but, considering all the circumstances, is prosecution the appropriate remedy. Equally, on conviction, it may provide mitigation, if the offender made no financial gain.

But this isn't a prosecution. It's a Penalty Fare.

 

[jumble]

Nothing turns on any of these matters. Even if a cap is or will be reached, when using pay as you go it's a requirement to validate an Oyster card at the start and end of a journey in order to have a valid ticket.

Is this true for freedom passes and over 60 passes?

 

[furlong]

Is this true for freedom passes and over 60 passes?

Yes But of course there should normally be no consequences from failing to do so for a similar 'public interest test' reason.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Apr 2026 ==

But this isn't a prosecution. It's a Penalty Fare.

(Which if unpaid may become a prosecution.)
TfL PF appeals have few stipulations, unlike NR ones. In reality, something that would have failed the public interest test shouldn't incur a PF either and we tend to see TfL take a unified common sense approach.

However, this discussion is probably moot as it's unlikely that a cap was hit, and they'd likely distinguish between a cap hit prior to the incident (for which I think a good case could be made) and one hit later in the day.

 

[Nigel]

Is this true for freedom passes and over 60 passes?

Yes But of course there should normally be no consequences from failing to do so for a similar 'public interest test' reason.

I'm not sure that is correct. While you are encouraged to tap in with a Freedom Pass/ 60+ Oyster (to demonstrate that is valid & for journey statistics), it does not become invalid if you don't. I believe that it is like a season ticket in that regard. Anyway, a bit off topic from the OPs original question.

 

[island]

And in the PF appeals process, the people deciding the appeal are free to take into account the lack of a financial motive if they wish, and conclude it was a simple mistake not requiring a penalty.

You should be clear when posting things like this that they represent your opinion of how things should work rather than a statement of law and policy. TfL's Penalty Fares appeal policy does not provide for appeals to succeed based on "lack of a financial motive" nor "simple mistakes". The standard required for an appeal to succeed is "significant and relevant mitigation and evidence put forward by the appellant".

 

[ikcdab]

We see this a lot and it isn't helped by the multiple nuanced meanings of the word "appeal". You can't appeal because you forgot or you made a mistake or you were otherwise careless. It's rather like the John McEnroe "you cannot be serious!". Appeals will only succeed if there has been a failure of the process or you have some new evidence to bring the the party. In this case you were arriving at the station and should be expecting to tap in.... No doubt others were doing the same thing.... And should have looked for the machine rather than just passing though. No doubt a mistake on your part, but exactly the sort of mistake that penalty fares are designed to catch to hopefully make you more careful next time.

 

[furlong]

exactly the sort of mistake that penalty fares are designed to catch

Absolutely not. Penalty fares are designed to catch deliberate fare evasion - and only deliberate fare evasion. That they also inevitably also catch some unintentional fare evasion is true and that was accepted by parliament when they were invented, but that is why there had to be an appeals mechanism and people should not be discouraged from using it if they were genuinely not intending to avoid paying. If appeal outcomes seem unfair, then it's for London Travelwatch / Transport Focus to review and report upon that. But without such appeals in the first place, that isn't going to happen. London Travelwatch / Transport Focus can then use their evidence to make the case for better protections for honest passengers inadvertently caught up in a scheme not intended to penalise them. The ORR recently also issued a report including some relevant observations.