Appealing unpaid fares notice

[Emi]

Hi all,

it's great that this service exists.

i've sent 3 appeals to the RPSS, and they keep rejecting my claims, just wanting some advice.

my reasoning behind my appeal is that it was only when I got on the train I realised that I did not have my railcard (though I did have my ticket) – so I went to find the ticket inspector to explain my situation. He told me that he could issue me with an unpaid fares notice, and that I could then take in my tickets and railcard at a later date to have the charges taken off.

If I had not been told that I would be able to have the fine removed I would not have stayed on the train, but would have got off at the next station.

this was on an East Coast train in october.

the fine has gone from 161 to 181. I couldn't even pay it when it way 135, I said as much to the ticket inspector, who told me that if i went to the station with my ticket and railcard i could get the fine removed. I clearly could do no such thing in the station, and have been sending sporadic letters to the RPSS.

The 'apppeals officer' keeps saying that there are no mitigating circumstances and rejecting my appeal, and another RPSS oficcial has sent me a letter saying that they are advising the rail service to take court proceedings. (which could result in 3 months imprisonment / 1000 fine.)

I appreciate that different departments are responding to me, but it is really confusing that they keep giving me contradictory information! And I find it really bizare that they refuse to provide an email address/ telephone number

as this is a civil and not a penal case - does this mean that i am not in danger of getting a criminal record?

Can you be imprisoned for commiting an administrative fault?

Is it worth talking to firends studying Law? i'm in Scotland (where it's different) but the incident did happen here?

Thanks for your help in advance

 

[yorkie]

Hi all,

it's great that this service exists.

i've sent 3 appeals to the RPSS, and they keep rejecting my claims, just wanting some advice.

my reasoning behind my appeal is that it was only when I got on the train I realised that I did not have my railcard (though I did have my ticket) – so I went to find the ticket inspector to explain my situation. He told me that he could issue me with an unpaid fares notice, and that I could then take in my tickets and railcard at a later date to have the charges taken off.

We need more information about the tickets held. Was this a single journey or as part of a return and exactly what tickets were originally held?

If I had not been told that I would be able to have the fine removed I would not have stayed on the train, but would have got off at the next station.

You were not fined. Guards do not issue fines.

this was on an East Coast train in october.

I would have sought advice then, not sure if we can still help, we can try but we will need full information.

the fine has gone from 161 to 181.

Have they really used the word "fine"? Or is it actually the fare plus admin fees for late payment.

I couldn't even pay it when it way 135, I said as much to the ticket inspector, who told me that if i went to the station with my ticket and railcard i could get the fine removed.

Not a fine, and the inspector should not have said that. I could have suggested alternative courses of action but as I have no idea what train you got, where the train stopped, and what time this was, I cannot comment on that. I guess it's a moot point now anyway.

I clearly could do no such thing in the station, and have been sending sporadic letters to the RPSS.

As you will see by searching other threads, RPSS will rarely deem an appeal successful. Even if the guard is in the wrong there is no guarantee they will realise this. They're a debt collection company.

The 'apppeals officer' keeps saying that there are no mitigating circumstances and rejecting my appeal,

What mitigating circumstances to forgetting your railcard have you claimed occured?

and another RPSS oficcial has sent me a letter saying that they are advising the rail service to take court proceedings. (which could result in 3 months imprisonment / 1000 fine.)

If you don't pay. They won't imprison you but you could certainly be fined a substantial amount. It's better to pay!

I appreciate that different departments are responding to me, but it is really confusing that they keep giving me contradictory information!

What contradictory information is that?

And I find it really bizare that they refuse to provide an email address/ telephone number

Their job is simply to get money out of people who have a bill to pay, they're not interested in talking on the phone to people trying to get out of paying.

as this is a civil and not a penal case - does this mean that i am not in danger of getting a criminal record?

What offence have they suggested you could be prosecuted for?

Can you be imprisoned for commiting an administrative fault?

I am not sure but that's not relevant to this thread, as there is no administrative fault here as far as I can tell.

Is it worth talking to firends studying Law? i'm in Scotland (where it's different) but the incident did happen here?

I would definitely seek legal advice, yes.

 

[RJ]

Emi: If you travel without a valid railcard, you need to pay for an undiscounted ticket. This is what the Unpaid Fare Notice represented. You might have been eligible for a refund on the unused discounted ticket.

By refusing to pay the UFN, it could be seen as attempting to avoid paying an appropriate fare, which is a criminal offence. Seeing as you have failed to lodge a successful appeal, it appears to have gotten to the stage where the UFN is no longer an option.

Had you posted here in the first place, I'd have advised you to pay the UFN and also suggesting that appealing would be pointless and only cost you more in admin fees. You haven't and now it's entirely possible you may face being prosecuted and landing a fine + having to pay the undiscounted fare you were obliged to pay. Hardly a risk worth taking in my opinion but each to their own. I'm not sure I'd advise taking absolute legal advice from friends studying law - I'd advise seeking out a proper, qualified solicitor.

If there was a phone line available to the public, it'd be constantly clogged up with people pleading their case. After all, nobody is going to think that they deserve to pay more than they already did.

I also advise that the correct terminology be used - I find it highly unlikely that even the least competent of guards would refer to an Unpaid Fare Notice as a "fine." I'd never advocate lodging appeals based on sympathy or compassion. This is owing to more or less 100% of people believing that they have compelling reasons for not having a valid authority to travel and a genuine belief that they did nothing wrong. "Compelling" is defined by the various legislations which form the contract between passengers and Train Operating Companies and in all my experience of the system (I have read said legislations down to the letter,) "I forgot my railcard" has never come up as a valid reason for avoiding paying the appropriate fare for the circumstance. I am certain however, that within those legislations, there are a list of very reasonable responsibilities that a passenger has, one of which is checking that you are in a position to present an appropriate railcard for your discounted ticket during travel.

Thus appealing on this basis is a waste of time and doing so repeatedly only makes the situation worse. I'm not saying it's not harsh and I'm not saying that you're unreasonable in wishing to be let off. But you didn't fulfill your responsibilities, you were given the chance to pay the appropriate fare which you've willfully declined so I'm unable to offer any advice which will result in the whole thing being called off, simply because you were in the wrong and haven't taken an appropriate level of responsibility for your actions. Best of luck.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Well, the good news is that you have come to the right place for advice of this nature, but that might be the end of the good news. Sadly I must agree with Yorkie and RJ that rather a lot of time has now passed and to have this claim against you removed at this stage is going to take lot of work, a lot of evidence and probably even some luck.

As Yorkie made clear, you have been dealing with a Debt Collection Agency, and they do what they're contracted to do, they collect their Clients' debts, including yours owed to East Coast.
You will have the Agency stop in their efforts to pursue the Debt if their client instructs them to stop, but that isn't likely. As I guess you now realise, you were technically travelling without a valid ticket (your discounted tickets are not valid if you cannot produce the relevant, valid, Railcard to justify the discount.) The UPFN was actually a form of permit to travel while the payment for the ticket for that journey would be made later - that is what it says, and that is what you will have been told. I often hear Guards telling passengers what may happen when issuing a UPFN and yes, it does include some re-assuring words such as "you can appeal" and " they can cancel the charge" but unfortunately, passengers seem only to hear the parts of the message that they want to hear - they imagine that they've been told that they can make a half-hearted appeal with no evidence several months later and they hear that the cost of the ticket will definitely not be sought. That is selective memory at work and I wonder if that, and a little bit of distraction, has been your downfall?
Maybe some Guards will try to be comforting and not emphasise the bad news, but the facts remain as they are - you were issued with a permit to travel in exchange for your payment after the event.

Whether or not you paid the UPFN immediately, you certainly should have prompty provided your evidential support to East Coast (copied to the Agency) to ask for the second ticket's cost to be waived.
I and others on here could have given you the best possible prospects of success with that letter at that time.

But now? Not much chance, not now that its gone for Collection as a Bad Debt.
You really should pay the Agency or get a general-purpose High Street Solicitor onto the matter (which is governed by English Law). They may charge you up to £800 if they suspect that its so late that a Defence in Court will be a real prospect (and it appears that you are rapidly reaching that stage). A specialist Railway Law Solicitor will charge £4000 upwards, but will probably not be of any greater assistance at this stage - in my opinion.

Nevertheless, there is no harm in making a DIY attempt at an Appeal to East Coast's Prosecutions Manager, with your Evidence and a grovelling apology for your delay in dealing with the matter. If you do, remember that you have already been given more 'slack' than most travellers will ever receive - you were carried while NOT having a valid ticket, and were given credit terms allowing you to pay later. Any DIY letter you write should acknowledge you gratitude for these credit terms (I could be much wealthier if I had such credit terms rather than paying for my many EC journeys weeks and months in advance!). If this is your first Railway Offence, then there is a slim chance that this Appeal will be successful, but please, don't mis-read this in the same way as you mis-heard the Guard. I am not saying that they WILL withdraw the charge for the second ticket any more than the Guard did not say that they WILL withdraw the charge.

You can Appeal. Appeals often fail. I spend a lot of time in Appeal Courts where people's sense of personal justice has affected their judgement, which so often is a horrid waste of their money persuing a 'victory' which no Court is ever going to give them. Please don't even start to think like that.

Leaving a Railcard behind is an expensive mistake, discussed on here with astonishing regularity, but the repetition doesn't make it cheaper.

In summary, its worth making an informed appeal to East Coast (with the Evidence in the form of your Railcard, original tickets and the UPFN), because it costs you little to do so, but making it persuasive is going to be the difficult part. Look at the costs. You've been warned of the cost of a succesful Claim in Court (it will probably be the cost of the ticket, plus admin costs around £120, and if you contest it and go through a Hearing, then you will surely fail and be charged a Fine for the Offence of travelling without a valid ticket and Victim Surcharge), and you've been given a hint of the costs from a Law Firm who, of course, will do what you ask and cannot guarantee any outcome.
Do the sums - I have. There aren't many choices open to you. Either pay and forget it, or make one very well substantiated appeal to EC and expect that you will probably still have to pay.

 

[Flamingo]

We have had reminders lately that we are to tell passengers that they will NOT get a refund if they send off their railcard at a later date if charged a new ticket or issued a UFN with a missing railcard - in August when all the 31/7 expired railcards were at their height, the message was pagered out to us several times a day.

 

[Emi]

Thanks Yorkie and RJ for the very swift responses.

Yorkie: it was an advanced young persons single ticket from edinburgh to london, with the east coast service. (costing around 40 quid). (I returned by bus)

RJ: the grounds on which i have appealed are that I was informed by the ticket inspector that if he issued me with an unpaid fares notice there and then - It could later be removed if i went back to the station in Edinburgh with my tickets and railcard.

my reasoning is: had I known that there was a chance that the fees would not be removed, I would have got off the train - I took my decision to stay on the train and sign the unpaid fees notice (instead of getting off at the next stop) because of (mis) information afforded to me by a uniformed official.

I now appreciate that the terms and conditions stipulate that all tickets and railcards are necessary for travel. At the time i had not read the small print - this is an error in dealing with any company.

From my perspective, my interaction with the railway service in that incidence was face to face with an official who advised me on a course of action - taking the penalty fare (you're right he didn't call it a fine)

Yorkie: one of the letters says 'your failure to pay the outstanding debt can be considered as an intention to avoid paying the fare due. the maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of £1,000 and/or three months imprisonment'.

Just wondering if perhaps writing to the rail service is also an option?

as long as there is no danger of getting a criminal record I think i'm going to try to keep writing to them for a while, or work out options with the citizens advice burreau. (getting 181 is going to be difficult in any case)

Again, thank you both very much for responding so quickly, although it's obviously not what I wanted to hear, it's very comforting to have some sort of direct contact with people.

I am also interested in whether you have heard of any incidences of people being taken to court.

thanks again

 

[Flamingo]

I am also interested in whether you have heard of any incidences of people being taken to court.

It happens regularly, as a guard I have to do the witness statements on a regular basis.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

RJ: the grounds on which i have appealed are . . . .

Sorry, but these 'excuses' are doomed.
Your assertion that the Guard misled you or that you have difficulty in being bound by small-print in a Contract will assure you of escalating costs accumulating rapidly followed by a Judgement against you and an application for those Costs (which I guess will be awarded). By that time, you'll possibly be paying £600 upwards)

I am also interested in whether you have heard of any incidences of people being taken to court.

Yes. There are a great many successful prosecutions every month following from simple contraventions of the Regulation of Railways Act or their Byelaws.
Its usually easy to spot those which might be successfully challenged at an early stage, and I have to say that yours is not one of them. Sorry.

 

[MikeWh]

@Emi: You may have missed a lengthy reply from DaveNewcastle while you were typing your recent post. It is well worth a read.

 

[WelshBluebird]

While I realise technically the OP should pay the UPFN, I really think there needs to be something done. It is simply not right that someone can be essentially lied to by the guard in terms of getting their money back / UPFN cancelled.

in the same way as you mis-heard the Guard. I am not saying that they WILL withdraw the charge for the second ticket any more than the Guard did not say that they WILL withdraw the charge.

Is there any reason you are assuming the OP mis-heard the guard??

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . .

Is there any reason you are assuming the OP mis-heard the guard??

That's a reasonable question, yes, I have made an assumption, with reasons. These are drawn from both experience and evidence, Flamingo's post assists us here:

We have had reminders lately that we are to tell passengers that they will NOT get a refund if they send off their railcard at a later date if charged a new ticket or issued a UFN with a missing railcard . . .

The unfortunate fact remains, that the Railway Operators know the legal framework, within which they operate, inside out. And the Facts are as you've admitted on here, Emi; you have travelled without a valid ticket and you have not paid the alternative permission offered to you and accepted by you, and nor have you had it revoked.

 

[RJ]

While I realise technically the OP should pay the UPFN, I really think there needs to be something done. It is simply not right that someone can be essentially lied to by the guard in terms of getting their money back / UPFN cancelled.

The guard has no authority to make such a comment as it isn't his decision. As such, the comment should be dismissed.

 

[yorkie]

Thanks Yorkie and RJ for the very swift responses.

Yorkie: it was an advanced young persons single ticket from edinburgh to london, with the east coast service. (costing around 40 quid). (I returned by bus)

Ah, an Advance ticket (non-refundable). If the original ticket was a ticket that was available for immediate travel (refundable), such as an Off Peak or Anytime ticket, then you would have got a refund (perhaps minus the £10 admin fee) on the original ticket. However Advance fares are non-refundable.

However, had you immediately paid for the new fare by paying the unpaid fare notice, and once payment was acknowledged and received, you had then put in a request for a refund of the Advance ticket, it's quite possible EC would have refunded you £30 or £40 as a gesture of goodwill. I know of another TOC operating a similar route who would definitely have done that, had your letter been apologetic, polite and concise.

But now, that you've dragged your feet and made it difficult for them and are refusing to pay? The chances are far less.

RJ: the grounds on which i have appealed are that I was informed by the ticket inspector that if he issued me with an unpaid fares notice there and then - It could later be removed if i went back to the station in Edinburgh with my tickets and railcard.

That isn't sufficient grounds, and have they not already told you that?

my reasoning is: had I known that there was a chance that the fees would not be removed, I would have got off the train - I took my decision to stay on the train and sign the unpaid fees notice (instead of getting off at the next stop) because of (mis) information afforded to me by a uniformed official.

I would definitely have got off the train at the next stop (Stevenage or Peterborough perhaps?) and got a new ticket from there, and possibly bought a replacement Railcard (but that would depend on whether you had the necessary documentation with you).

I now appreciate that the terms and conditions stipulate that all tickets and railcards are necessary for travel. At the time i had not read the small print - this is an error in dealing with any company.

True, for which the price is a new ticket, and a possible refund of the old one if you ask nicely.

From my perspective, my interaction with the railway service in that incidence was face to face with an official who advised me on a course of action - taking the penalty fare (you're right he didn't call it a fine)

It's not a penalty fare either. It's the standard Anytime single fare (now with admin fees on top).

Yorkie: one of the letters says 'your failure to pay the outstanding debt can be considered as an intention to avoid paying the fare due. the maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of £1,000 and/or three months imprisonment'.

In that case it's a criminal record and substantial fine that you're facing. You won't go to prison unless you have some previous record. It would make you unemployable in some jobs though as a CRB check would show this criminal record, if found guilty.

Just wondering if perhaps writing to the rail service is also an option?

Bit late now!

as long as there is no danger of getting a criminal record I think i'm going to try to keep writing to them for a while, or work out options with the citizens advice burreau. (getting 181 is going to be difficult in any case)

The risk of a criminal record is very real indeed. Just pay the debt (which isn't a fine; it's a single fare plus admin fees for late payment)

Again, thank you both very much for responding so quickly, although it's obviously not what I wanted to hear, it's very comforting to have some sort of direct contact with people.

Sorry you couldn't have found this forum as soon as you made your journey. Had I been sat near you I'd have handed you one of our 'business cards' if I'd had one on me!

I am also interested in whether you have heard of any incidences of people being taken to court.

Yes, we have. There are numerous threads on this forum. Our advice is to avoid letting it get that far.

You can be prosecuted over this, and we've even had cases over 10p (Northern Rail). I've not heard of EC being so petty as that but they would almost definitely prosecute over a £130+ fare. And to defend that robustly you'd need a good solicitor who is experienced in railway ticketing matters - quite a specialist area - there is a shortage of affordable solicitor who specialise in this area, so expect to pay a 4-figure sum if you want a good defence.

Take my advice now and pay the debt.

Do you still have the original ticket that you were unable to use? You could write a polite apologetic letter after the debt has been cleared and you never know, they may refund it, but they are certainly not obliged to, and the chances of them doing that are probably rapidly reducing....

 

[WelshBluebird]

The guard has no authority to make such a comment as it isn't his decision. As such, the comment should be dismissed.

But a normal passenger who is unaware of the details of how ToC's deal with such incidents would not know this.
They would just take the guards work as if he was talking for the ToC.
Now, if the guard said "in my opinion, I think you may be able to get the UPFN cancelled if you go into a ticket office .." then I would agree.

That's a reasonable question, yes, I have made an assumption, with reasons. These are drawn from both experience and evidence, Flamingo's post assists us here:The unfortunate fact remains, that the Railway Operators know the legal framework, within which they operate, inside out.

And yet guards still get things wrong, and many occasions.
Personally I am inclined to believe the OP heard the guard correctly, as I have heard guards say all sorts of things that I know are not correct.
Also, IIRC Flamingo works for FGW. So just because he has been told things by his ToC, it does not mean the guard working for East Coast has been told the same.

 

[Nick W]

Any chance of an appeal using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_Terms_in_Consumer_Contracts_Regulations_1999 ?

 

[BestWestern]

But a normal passenger who is unaware of the details of how ToC's deal with such incidents would not know this.
They would just take the guards work as if he was talking for the ToC.
Now, if the guard said "in my opinion, I think you may be able to get the UPFN cancelled if you go into a ticket office .." then I would agree.

And yet guards still get things wrong, and many occasions.

I would have to say that I feel this is a very valid point, though not one that will assist the OP in this case Guards do sometimes get it wrong, make incorrect statements, or fall down due to their particular TOC's poor level of revenue training. It irritates me greatly that this continues unabated, as it not only lets the side down and provides poor service, but means that we must consider it potentially truthful if somebody claims they were told something which is clearly incorrect by another member of staff. I'm thinking also here of the recent post from the traveller hauled over the coals by XC after one of their TM's refused to acknowledge the previous TM allowing the passenger to travel. On the forgotten Railcard issue in particular, there is a general assumption among many pax that if they present their card at a later stage they will be refunded, it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that some staff are also unclear on the position.

Perhaps TOC's ought to finally bite the bullet and provide front line staff with regular retail refresher and update training; failing that they could always put in the T&C's that punters must not take any notice of anything that staff tell them about their ticket... :roll:

 

[yorkie]

... it does not mean the guard working for East Coast has been told the same.

East Coast have been told:

...please do not tell
customers to go to a Travel Centre seeking a
refund on what you have just issued, as
effectively you are saying you are wrong to have
issued it!

The only time a passenger should be referred to
a Travel Centre for a possible refund is where
the original ticket they have is refundable (e.g.
Anytime fare routed ‘GC only’) and hasn’t been
used because you issued them with a correct
ticket for East Coast.

A guard could reasonably say "The original ticket is non-refundable, however if you write in, explaining your mistake, there's always the possibility they may show discretion, there's no harm trying, but I cannot promise anything" or something like that.

 

[WelshBluebird]

A guard could reasonably say "The original ticket is non-refundable, however if you write in, explaining your mistake, there's always the possibility they may show discretion, there's no harm trying, but I cannot promise anything" or something like that.

I agree. If what the guard said was essentially what you have there, then I retract what I have said. However, if the guard did specifically say the OP would get it cancelled, then I do feel it is quite unfair that he has little option but to pay it.

The problem we have is quite often people get conflicted messages about what is ok and what isn't, and sometimes the advice given to them is simply wrong.

Of course, this isn't just the ToC's or guards fault. As Best Western has said, some people do think that they are allowed to do things they are not. And the above issues regarding advice given does not help that.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

A guard could reasonably say "The original ticket is non-refundable, however if you write in, explaining your mistake, there's always the possibility they may show discretion, there's no harm trying, but I cannot promise anything" or something like that.

That is very much the manner in which I have heard passengers had their options explained to them. Having the ticket (the UPFN) cancelled is not an automatic consequence, not even a probable consequence.

Any chance of an appeal using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_Terms_in_Consumer_Contracts_Regulations_1999 ?

I don't expect there's any prospect of success here. That's really a decision that should be made after reviewing the Evidence, but in this case, there appears only to be a ticket available as physical evidence, and no doubt two irreconcilable oral statements.
To challenge the Conditions themselves in a Judicial Review would cost tens of thousands.

 

[mumrar]

We have had reminders lately that we are to tell passengers that they will NOT get a refund if they send off their railcard at a later date if charged a new ticket or issued a UFN with a missing railcard - in August when all the 31/7 expired railcards were at their height, the message was pagered out to us several times a day.

The odd occasion where CrossCountry differ for the better - the company has a 28 day production of railcard refund policy.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I think in this case it is helpful to give a bit of background to the OP and elaborate a bit further. While I know regulars will know this, I am posting some of these comments for the benefit of the OP.

First of all the OP had a ticket discounted with a Railcard. Whether it was purchased online or at a station the same text is clearly marked in bold on both the leaflet and the website:

You must carry your Railcard with you on your journey and when asked by rail staff, you must show a valid ticket and valid Railcard. If you fail to do so, you will be required to pay the full price Standard Single fare for your journey as if no ticket was purchased before starting the journey and in some cases a Penalty Fare.

And the National Rail Conditions of Carriage :

You must show and, if asked to do so by the staff of a Train Company or its agent, hand
over for inspection a valid ticket and any relevant Railcard, photocard or other form of
personal identification in accordance with Condition 15. If you do not, you will be treated
as having joined a train without a ticket and the relevant parts of Condition 2 or 4 will
apply.

In this case the OP did not have the Railcard when they travelled. Thus, the ticket they had is rendered completely invalid, and so you are liable to pay the full single fare. As He / She did not have the funds available to pay the fare at the time he was given an UNPAID FARES NOTICE.

The description of an UPFN from the RPSS website is helpful here, to clear up any confusion in the mind of the OP as regards a fine / penalty fare / accusation of intent etc.

Whilst you were not issued with a penalty fare, you have been issued with an unpaid fare notice when you travelled because you were unable to produce a valid ticket for inspection when requested. This has nothing to do with any intention you may have had and is not a fine. It is merely a notice to pay the amount due for the journey that you actually made when you could not present a valid ticket.

Unpaid fares notices (UFN) are very different from penalty fares notices and make no extra charge, penalty or fine in the first instance. The amount outstanding shown on the UFN is only the correct fare for the actual journey that has been made. Simply, the passenger has completed their journey and now has a bill to pay because a valid ticket was not available for inspection when they travelled.

There are always mitigating circumstances for not having a valid ticket and while these may be compelling, they tend to be irrelevant to the facts of a UFN strict liabilty matter. Any appeal would therefore need to prove that the ticket shown when travelling was actually valid for the exact journey which was made. Even producing a valid ticket or railcard later does not negate liabilty to pay the UFN bill for not producing a valid ticket when requested at the time of travel.

Please be aware that making an appeal does not mean that payment of any amount outstanding is suspended. Debt recovery action is separate from any appeal and administration fees may be incurred if full payment is not made within the time specified.

As the OP did not pay the UPFN within the timescales the fees have been added.

At the early stage of a UPFN then, as it says, there is no accusation of any intention to avoid paying the correct fare, so if a TOC went straight to prosecution before a UPFN (which often happens if you get stopped by a Revenue Protection Officer as opposed to a Guard) then the most you could be done for is a Byelaw offence which is a strict liability matter. No criminal record would occur, you'd just get a fine.

It is strict liability in that no evidence of any intention is required. Simply 2 questions must be answered:

Did the passenger have a ticket? Yes.
Did they have a Railcard to support the discount they had been given on the fare? No.
Therefore the ticket is not valid.
Did they have the money to pay for a valid ticket? No.

End of discussion, case proved, guilty.

Unfortunately, once you have been given a UPFN you have been given the chance to pay later. If you subsequently decide not pay (for whatever reason) then it could be inferred that you are attempting to avoid paying the correct fare (as you have been given all reasonable chances to do so, but still have not paid the fare). This is a more serious offence which does generate a criminal record.

In this case the OP must discount any attempt to appeal on the basis that they did in fact have a railcard but they had left it at home, or that they weren't aware of the T&Cs, as these points are irrelevant.

So we come to the point about what the Guard actually said.

I agree with previous posters that passengers do often have selective hearing when it comes to what they are told by staff, but I am not saying this has definitely happened here and I am not accusing the OP of lying. Many times I have been asked to explain comments from passengers via customer relations when the passenger has said "the bloke on the train said that if I went to the station / contacted you directly I would get it cancelled" - when I quite clearly said nothing of the sorts.

However, it is a very difficult line to tread. I normally don't say directly "There is no point appealing as you won't win, you'll have to pay it anyway, and there is no point in contacting customer relations at all", as no matter how politely and nicely you said something like this, it would only cause a huge row on the train. But I do not lie. I always say "that it must be paid within 7 days, you are welcome to right in and appeal to the address shown, they may decide to accept your appeal, they may not. I don't deal with that side of things so you should contact them directly and see what they say." or something similar.

Whilst this may be seen as offering false hope (and in many cases it is) it eases a difficult situation and prevents unnecessary conflict.

Sadly I am often aware that some of my colleagues may not be quite so clear on the matter. Indeed, somebody somewhere must be telling people about refunds as we too have had lots of notices recently similar to those mentioned by Flamingo - notices saying to us "When passengers have an invalid ticket and have had to purchase a new ticket or been issued with a UPFN to complete their journey, please DO NOT tell them they are entitled to a refund if they subsequently produce any missing documents or portions of tickets - as in most cases they are not"

In most cases it is not a case of staff members being ill informed, but simply wanting to avoid conflict and pass the buck (in terms of delivering the bad news) to somebody else, and sadly happens too frequently all over the place - on stations and trains.

So, for the OP what happens now.

Well I suggest the following:

1) Pay the bill from RPSS IMMEDIATELY to prevent the costs escalating and the case going to court. If you cannot afford to pay, find a friend that can.

2) Then, once that has been done and the risk of going to court has gone, write a clear letter to East Coast Customer Relations saying exactly what the Guard said. They may well be able to contact the Guard and see if he can recall what he said - although I suspect quite a bit of time has passed. Or they may have similar records of that staff member telling porkies before. I don't know, but there is no harm in trying. When you contact East Coast please do not try and pull any heart strings, or try and offer any excuse about not reading the T&Cs etc. Stick simply to the facts. Say you now realise you were wrong, you should have paid sooner, however you genuinely believe you were given false information by staff and you wouldn't have continued your journey had you known. You may, if you are lucky, get some money or a voucher from East Coast. But don't quote me on it.

 

[RJ]

I used to tell people that they had the right to appeal and leave it there. If they asked if they'd get their money back, I'd be honest and quote the appliable clauses the led to me issuing the notice in the first place.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't wish to quote a huge long post to say nothing except "I agree", but kwvr45's post #21 contains exactly the advice I would give.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is the likely reason for any mistaken suggestions by staff probably due to the fact that in the case of a forgotten season ticket or related photocard the rule is that an additional ticket can be refunded, or an UPFN/PF cancelled? Condition 35 in NRCofC - still dscretionary of course...

 

[AlterEgo]

Is the likely reason for any mistaken suggestions by staff probably due to the fact that in the case of a forgotten season ticket or related photocard the rule is that an additional ticket can be refunded, or an UPFN/PF cancelled? Condition 35 in NRCofC - still dscretionary of course...

Possibly, but it is also likely that some on-train staff will say anything to pacify a potentially angry or upset customer, with whom they may have to share an enclosed space for two hours...

 

[WillPS]

I feel kind of sorry for the OP - not because of any promises that may or may not have been made but because the lack of any CrossCountry-style send in your railcard later policy is ludicrous.

 

[AlterEgo]

I feel kind of sorry for the OP - not because of any promises that may or may not have been made but because the lack of any CrossCountry-style send in your railcard later policy is ludicrous.

Why is it ludicrous?

The OP broke the Terms and Conditions of his ticket - this is a fact. It is regrettable that it's taken this long to be sorted out. I am sure that a letter sent to East Coast within days of him being issued the UFN would have seen at least some kind of satisfaction, whether it be a refund on the unused ticket, or something else.

Operating a policy whereby each person who breaks the TnCs then have the opportunity to claim a refund is far more expensive and time-consuming for the TOC than you might think.

 

[WillPS]

I'm not disputing the fact he invalidated his ticket by breaking the T&Cs, I'm stating that the "no railcard = new ticket + no refunds" rule is harsh and unfair. Sure, write out a UPFN but if they actually held a valid railcard and can supply proof, no harm done.

 

[Yew]

I'm not disputing the fact he invalidated his ticket by breaking the T&Cs, I'm stating that the "no railcard = new ticket + no refunds" rule is harsh and unfair. Sure, write out a UPFN but if they actually held a valid railcard and can supply proof, no harm done.

I agree with you there, XC has many faults, that is a good step for the customer. Penalising those who try it on, without penalising those who make an innocent mistake

 

[snail]

I'm not disputing the fact he invalidated his ticket by breaking the T&Cs, I'm stating that the "no railcard = new ticket + no refunds" rule is harsh and unfair. Sure, write out a UPFN but if they actually held a valid railcard and can supply proof, no harm done.

Yes, this situation is really no different to the "I've forgotten my season ticket" scenario when you are allowed a refund on the replacement ticket. It should be a fairly simple exercise:
1. Confirm the railcard is valid and was issued prior to the journey
2. Confirm that the original ticket would have been valid with the railcard.

Of course it would need some kind of central record to be kept of railcard issue to limit the number of claims per year. I think that is the tricky part.