ScotRail penalty fare

[Starmill]

By using the service the passenger is deemed to have accepted the prevailing conditions.

Precisely correct. ScotRail is also.

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

Having checked I was thinking of the Byelaws, of which they do have their own set.

Indeed. And if the Byelaw were being used then I doubt we'd be having this conversation. It's not the policy being questioned, it's the cakeism.

 

[Buzby]

Precisely correct. ScotRail is also.

You misunderstand - on purpose? Transport is devolved in the country. They can modify or create their own standards, and clearly have done so.

 

[Starmill]

You misunderstand - on purpose? Transport is devolved in the country. They can modify or create their own standards, and clearly have done so.

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Buzby]

You don't know what you're talking about.

What an erudite observation. Try living in the country first.

 

[35B]

You misunderstand - on purpose? Transport is devolved in the country. They can modify or create their own standards, and clearly have done so.

On what legal basis? And how does it work to have a unilateral Scottish COC when the point of the NRCOT is that it’s a contract binding all operators on the British network?

 

[Bletchleyite]

On what legal basis? And how does it work to have a unilateral Scottish COC when the point of the NRCOT is that it’s a contract binding all operators on the British network?

Operators can apply their own conditions and rules. They just can't be lesser than those provided for by the NRCoT except where explicitly provided, e.g. luggage. A tenner is lesser than prosecution...

An example in current use is that tickets are sold on board Hull Trains services without penalty.

 

[AlterEgo]

You misunderstand - on purpose? Transport is devolved in the country. They can modify or create their own standards, and clearly have done so.

You've already been informed rail isn't fully devolved. Only certain matters are, like funding, strategic policy, the letting of franchises etc.

No, they cannot modify or supersede the NRCoT to the disfavour of the passenger, or change the Railway Bylaws. Scotrail cannot do whatever it likes; it has to operate within that framework. The situation with reference to a minimum fare is no different to an English TOC, so we are curious as to what lawful basis that will have. Clearly, you don't know, and are not contributing anything meaningful to the discussion.

Operators can apply their own conditions and rules. They just can't be lesser than those provided for by the NRCoT except where explicitly provided, e.g. luggage. A tenner is lesser than prosecution...

If it's more expensive than the published Anytime fare it will disfavour the customer, because Condition 9 explains that is a sanction available. The presence of a Condition which basically reminds a passenger about criminal legislation would not be a basis for GTR to charge invented onboard fares of £200 "because that is cheaper than what a court fine would be". It also wouldn't be a basis to charge them £10 either, unless that was actually the Anytime fare as per the fare structure. In Wales - under the English and Welsh legal system - you can't even charge £20 as a penalty fare without the protection of a separate Penalty Fares scheme. of course that was also the case in England until recently.

What Scotrail are treading around - and not very well - is justifying the £10 as a necessary charge and not as a civil penalty (which would be illegal). However, given all their publicity around this, quoting, verbatim: "ScotRail to tackle ticketless travel", "purposefully didn’t buy their ticket before boarding", "period of education", "Every pound lost through fraudulent travel is money that would have been reinvested" - would demonstrate to me that this is clearly a policy borne of a desire to tackle behaviour it views as detrimental to its business and is designed as a penalty to change or reduce those behaviours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If it's more expensive than the published Anytime fare it will disfavour the customer, because Condition 9 explains that is a sanction available.

It's a sanction available to the railway, but the passenger can't choose it. Which sanction is used is the railway's choice. Because the highest sanction, which is possible (though difficult and rare) in Scotland, is prosecution, which would result in a fine well in excess of £10, I can't see why offering a disposal by way of a minimum fare of £10 is not considerably less onerous and thus perfectly OK.

What Scotrail are treading around - and not very well - is justifying the £10 as a necessary charge and not as a civil penalty (which would be illegal). However, given all their publicity around this, quoting, verbatim: "ScotRail to tackle ticketless travel", "purposefully didn’t buy their ticket before boarding", "period of education", "Every pound lost through fraudulent travel is money that would have been reinvested" - would demonstrate to me that this is clearly a policy borne of a desire to tackle behaviour it views as detrimental to its business and is designed as a penalty to change or reduce those behaviours.

Of course it is, and any passenger who does the right thing and buys their ticket before boarding (provided there is a means to do so, and if there isn't it doesn't apply) should support it. It's considerably less onerous than Penalty Fares or prosecution - being charged a tenner wrongly is just not on the same level.

Might they need to iron out the legalese a bit? Possibly. But anyone who would actually consider legally challenging this rather than debating it on a forum (some random "ned" isn't going to, they'll just give the staff a gobful of abuse and run away without paying it) needs to give their head a wobble to be honest. Any legitimate passenger should be in support of small scale anti-fare-evasion measures like these. It's even legit (like Edinburgh Trams) to choose to pay the £10 if you're in a rush and time is more important than the money, unlike any scheme in England!

 

[Tetchytyke]

As far as I'm aware, there is nothing publicly available which explains how ScotRail actually intends to implement the minimum fare.

Their press release states:

A period of education will be implemented from 1 April 2026 until July 2026, following which a £10 minimum fare will be put in place.

So, at present, the 'education' can be a Ticket Examiner or guard simply telling the passenger that, from July, if they buy on board their ticket will cost a minimum of a tenner.

My view would be that increasing any Anytime fare which is less than a tenner to £10, and charging that, would be sufficient to comply with the Byelaws and the NRCoT. They would also have to bring in a separate tier of ticket to charge the lower fare.

I don't see anything which says they can only have one Anytime fare, but if they both have the same name I can well see some doofus selecting the £10 fare at a TVM and then bleating about it in the papers.

The higher fare would be a 'full undiscounted single' and I don't see that there's anything to say they can't do that. It's not a Penalty Fare and it's not a penalty fare, it is simply the 'full undiscounted single.'

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2026 ==

clearly a policy borne of a desire to tackle behaviour it views as detrimental to its business and is designed as a penalty to change or reduce those behaviours.

None of that makes it unlawful.

Setting your pricing structure to incentivise people to pay for your goods or services in the way that you want them to is not (in my opinion) unlawful, neither in Scotland nor in England and Wales.

 

[Kite159]

I would imagine 95% of the time if a pay when challenged passenger gets caught out on the train travelling between two unbarriered stations where the fare is £5 they will be sold a regular priced ticket, maybe even offered the chance for a railcard discount. Only 5% of the staff (if even that) will enforce the £10 minimum fare.

Similar within England where some guards will sell discounted tickets on board the train and a small number will only sell the full anytime fares when it's clear that passenger had the chance to buy before they boarded but decided to chance it (i.e walking past an open ticket office/multiple TVMs)

 

[RPI]

If it's more expensive than the published Anytime fare it will disfavour the customer, because Condition 9 explains that is a sanction available. The presence of a Condition which basically reminds a passenger about criminal legislation would not be a basis for GTR to charge invented onboard fares of £200 "because that is cheaper than what a court fine would be". It also wouldn't be a basis to charge them £10 either, unless that was actually the Anytime fare as per the fare structure. In Wales - under the English and Welsh legal system - you can't even charge £20 as a penalty fare without the protection of a separate Penalty Fares scheme. of course that was also the case in England until recently.

What Scotrail are treading around - and not very well - is justifying the £10 as a necessary charge and not as a civil penalty (which would be illegal). However, given all their publicity around this, quoting, verbatim: "ScotRail to tackle ticketless travel", "purposefully didn’t buy their ticket before boarding", "period of education", "Every pound lost through fraudulent travel is money that would have been reinvested" - would demonstrate to me that this is clearly a policy borne of a desire to tackle behaviour it views as detrimental to its business and is designed as a penalty to change or reduce those behaviours.

But they could, potentially, create for example a £10 "Anytime" single for all of these journeys and just filter them out of interfaces used by the public, such as TVM's. I can't see there being an issue having an SDS for a journey of £2.70 then an SOS fare for £10. The individual restriction for that SOS could be that it's Valid for one day etc etc. however, that is purely speculation.

 

[Starmill]

What an erudite observation. Try living in the country first.

My suggestion would be to have a read of the contract. It appears you aren't familiar with it. I particularly recommend reading the sections on where it applies.

But they could, potentially, create for example a £10 "Anytime" single for all of these journeys and just filter them out of interfaces used by the public, such as TVM's. I can't see there being an issue having an SDS for a journey of £2.70 then an SOS fare for £10. The individual restriction for that SOS could be that it's Valid for one day etc etc. however, that is purely speculation.

There would have been plenty of sensible approaches, absolutely. This may well have been one of them.

An example in current use is that tickets are sold on board Hull Trains services without penalty.

Indeed so. GC and HT in normal circumstances encourage anyone who hasn't booked in advance to pay on the train. They do say they prefer card payment if using that option though.