Advice for arguing penalty fare despite tap in during journey

Sun Chariot said:

And I'm still not clear if, at West Ham TfL station entrance, you tried tapping the Pink (continuation of journey) scanner-reader, or the yellow (journey start / end) scanner-reader.
At West Ham C2C, you definitely tapped the yellow (end of journey) scanner-reader - it's why you see your Barking to West Ham leg as a completed journey.

Click to expand...

From memory there aren't pink readers at West Ham.

From memory there are yellow standalone readers in the subway by the stairs up to the c2c platform. These are there so that people can start or end their journey on Contactless/Oyster before using paper tickets for their onward journey on c2c. These yellow readers are, also from memory, set to continuation exit, which means that if you touch somewhere else later it will disregard the touch but if you don't it won't. If you inadvertently touch one it shouldn't actually matter, providing you are able to touch out at your destination.

It's worth noting that these standalone readers are in addition to the usual readers at the main gateline entrance to the station, which is why I asked if the OP can recall if they went through the gateline.

Tetchytyke said:

You seem to have an unfortunate habit of making very bold assertions that aren't necessarily backed up by the facts. It's probably best not to unless you understand how it all works. You did the same thing on the thread about Apple Pay and you were wrong there too.

Click to expand...

What we have is a difference in opinion. An appeal here is going to be based on technical assertions. It's a lot of hassle and might not end up being fruitful. It's my personal opinion that this is not worth the stress. Historical threads show that the appeals staff can hardly understand what's going on in a normal case, let alone one with all these technical caveats.

It might be helpful for OP (and myself) if you can produce a thread that has been successful in the past on these technicalities to help them decide if pursuing this would be worthwhile

And in the Apple Pay case you reference, the appeal was accepted because the OP there was able to state "I paid for my journey, here is the proof", with an attachment of their TfL webpage. The OP here cannot say this. That appeal was not accepted becasue of the lengthy discussions on whether the Apple pay features at play were faulty.

Tetchytyke said:

As we've seen with the recent Apple Pay thread, though, the competence and understanding of the RPIs employed by Arriva Rail London seems to be declining rapidly.

Click to expand...

That case involved Southeastern, not Arriva Rail London.

Tetchytyke said:

There should be two tabs: payment history and journey history. From memory the journey history tab is the one we need to see.

It should look something like this (this is for Contactless not Oyster):
View attachment 208868


Can you recall if you went through any ticket barriers (the automatic gates) at West Ham?

Click to expand...

The screenshot is from my journey history. I don't even see a payment history tab on the website. Here it is in PDF form as well. I don't believe I went through any ticket gates at West Ham, to the best of my memory. This was all using my Oyster card, not contactless. I do use both and have both connected to my TfL account, but I only used Oyster on my outbound journey this day.

anonymous2026 said:

I don't believe I went through any ticket gates at West Ham, to the best of my memory.

Click to expand...

@MikeWh 's (rather excellent) website explains the issues with continuation exit here in technical detail:

Continuation Exits
There are a number of stations where it isn’t always obvious whether you should touch out or not using platform validators. Usually these validators were intended to start or end Oyster journeys without leaving the station because the overall journey continued using paper tickets on National Rail. In order to avoid problems at the station gatelines and/or the deduction of maximum fares due to unresolved journeys, the validators at these stations are set to continuation exit. Note that this does not apply to readers attached to a gateline.

How it works
When you touch out at a standalone validator at one of these stations your fare is adjusted correctly as if you were leaving the Oyster system. Any further touches at that station within 15 minutes (including at a gateline) will replicate the exit with no further deduction. If you continue on from that station by a different mode then when you exit at your final destination the balance is readjusted for the new end point, as long as the new exit is within the maximum journey time from the station where you started your journey.

The drawbacks
There are two drawbacks to be aware of. Firstly, if there are no gates at the station then you must touch out using a validator if that is the end of your journey. However, it is impossible to touch in until 15 minutes has elapsed. If you did not want to stay very long at one of these places then this could cause a problem.

Secondly there may be a problem with National Rail RPIs. The exit touch removes the maximum fare which is what the RPIs are looking for when they check the card using a hand-held reader. If they examine the recent journey history on the card it will appear as though you are out of the system and travelling without a validated Oyster card.

If at all possible you should only touch out and back in again at an interchange station if it is absolutely necessary, usually because one or both parts of the station are protected by gates.

The stations
These are the stations where standalone validators are set to continuation exit:

Barking
Chalfont & Latimer
Elmers End
Farringdon
Finsbury Park LU
Harrow & Wealdstone
Harrow-on-the-Hill
Highbury & Islington
Kensington Olympia
Kentish Town (disabled while the Underground station is closed)
Moorgate
Old Street
Seven Sisters
South Ruislip
Stratford
Watford Junction
West Croydon
West Ham
West Ruislip
Wimbledon
Woolwich Arsenal DLR

Click to expand...

So you need to go back to TfL for a second stage appeal being succinct:

You touched in at Barking.
You accidentally/inadvertently/mistakenly touched a standalone yellow reader set to continuation exit at West Ham when you were interchanging between c2c and Jubilee Line.
You were stopped by an RPI at Homerton who incorrectly believed you hadn't touched in. That RPI prevented you from touching out on the readers at Homerton.
If the RPI had not prevented you from touching out, the continuation exit at West Ham would have resolved with the correct fare being deducted from your Oyster.
The appeal is therefore on the basis that you had touched in correctly and had paid the fare due/ was prevented by an authorised officer from paying the fare due.

Mattplans said:

What we have is a difference in opinion.

Click to expand...

You didn't express an opinion, you stated a bald fact that the OP was clearly in the wrong. That's not a matter of opinion, that is objectively untrue. He may or may not be in the wrong, but it certainly isn't clear.

Mattplans said:

Historical threads show that the appeals staff can hardly understand what's going on in a normal case

Click to expand...

This is true for the first stage, which is dealt with by IRCAS, whose staff generally struggle to understand the difference between their arse and their elbow.

Second stage appeals are considered by TfL prosecutions staff. They do tend to understand things a bit more.

In any case, the OP has nothing to lose by appealing all the way to the third stage if necessary.

Tetchytyke said:

From memory there aren't pink readers at West Ham.

From memory there are yellow standalone readers in the subway by the stairs up to the c2c platform. These are there so that people can start or end their journey on Contactless/Oyster before using paper tickets for their onward journey on c2c.

Click to expand...

This is correct.

There is a gateline to the left of the entrance / exit to the C2C platforms but they are a short walk away.

So you need to go back to TfL for a second stage appeal being succinct:

You touched in at Barking.
You accidentally/inadvertently/mistakenly touched a standalone yellow reader set to continuation exit at West Ham when you were interchanging between c2c and Jubilee Line.
You were stopped by an RPI at Homerton who incorrectly believed you hadn't touched in. That RPI prevented you from touching out on the readers at Homerton.
If the RPI had not prevented you from touching out, the continuation exit at West Ham would have resolved with the correct fare being deducted from your Oyster.
The appeal is therefore on the basis that you had touched in correctly and had paid the fare due/ was prevented by an authorised officer from paying the fare due.



Thank you, this is the succint explanation I needed and I will proceed with this. Based on what I'm reading in the first appeal rejection email I received, it seems they want me submit my second appeal via email to ap@tfl.gov.uk - with the penalty fare reference code, of course. For those with experience, does that sound correct? As the first appeal was submitted through an online portal, not email, but my understanding is that a different team handles appeals 2 & 3, so I suppose that is why it is being submitted differently? Just want to make sure I'm not misreading the instructions and am going to miss the opportunity to appeal properly because I attempted to do so by email and not through some secret second-appeal portal that I'm not seeing.

I believe it has been established that the OP was interchanging from National Rail to Underground at West Ham, and incorrectly tapped their card on the standalone yellow validators at the bottom of the stairs coming down from the National Rail platforms, when the correct course of action was to ignore those readers.

I have extracted these two pictures from two Youtube videos (here and here), showing the overhead signage a passenger coming down the stairs is faced with (including two signs stating "Card Reader"), and, from the opposite direction, what the area around one of the card readers looks like. Can anyone confirm what the signs on the wall by the card readers state? Is it made absolutely clear that you shouldn't tap them if you're already tapped in on your Oyster/contactless card and wish to continue with the same card, or is it sufficiently unclear that TfL shouldn't be penalising passengers who mistakenly tap them? The dark blue sign might be the same as one at Highbury & Islington that just states "Oyster and contactless users / Please touch your card on the reader" (but lacking the accompanying clarifying sign "National Rail ticket holders only / Only touch this reader if you need to start or end an Oyster pay as you go journey here and have a valid ticket for the National Rail part of your journey" present at H&I). (That picture was posted in a forum thread discussing misleading signage for yellow validators, and there was also some discussion about what would/should happen if inspected after such a mistaken tap.)

pelli said:

I believe it has been established that the OP was interchanging from National Rail to Underground at West Ham, and incorrectly tapped their card on the standalone yellow validators at the bottom of the stairs coming down from the National Rail platforms, when the correct course of action was to ignore those readers.

I have extracted these two pictures from two Youtube videos (here and here), showing the overhead signage a passenger coming down the stairs is faced with (including two signs stating "Card Reader"), and, from the opposite direction, what the area around one of the card readers looks like. Can anyone confirm what the signs on the wall by the card readers state? Is it made absolutely clear that you shouldn't tap them if you're already tapped in on your Oyster/contactless card and wish to continue with the same card, or is it sufficiently unclear that TfL shouldn't be penalising passengers who mistakenly tap them? The dark blue sign might be the same as one at Highbury & Islington that just states "Oyster and contactless users / Please touch your card on the reader" (but lacking the accompanying clarifying sign "National Rail ticket holders only / Only touch this reader if you need to start or end an Oyster pay as you go journey here and have a valid ticket for the National Rail part of your journey" present at H&I). (That picture was posted in a forum thread discussing misleading signage for yellow validators, and there was also some discussion about what would/should happen if inspected after such a mistaken tap.)

Click to expand...

Unless the signage has changed recently it is just the standard oyster card signage is the same as at Highbury and Islington.

At busy times (and that space is quite tight so it is often busy) it is also quite easy to miss them and forget to touch in following a journey made using a paper or other NR ticket (though that isn't the case here). So they are probably inadequately signed either way - the inadequate it would appear for the OP who didn't realise they SHOULDN'T touch them and inadequate for people (including me on one occasion!) who SHOULD!

anonymous2026 said:

Thank you, this is the succint explanation I needed and I will proceed with this. Based on what I'm reading in the first appeal rejection email I received, it seems they want me submit my second appeal via email to ap@tfl.gov.uk - with the penalty fare reference code, of course. For those with experience, does that sound correct? As the first appeal was submitted through an online portal, not email, but my understanding is that a different team handles appeals 2 & 3, so I suppose that is why it is being submitted differently? Just want to make sure I'm not misreading the instructions and am going to miss the opportunity to appeal properly because I attempted to do so by email and not through some secret second-appeal portal that I'm not seeing.

Click to expand...

Just seen this. I'm not sure about whether it is normal to send a second appeal to a different place, but it seems legitimate. Follow the instructions and use the wording suggested. West Ham is a nightmare for people changing trains - I have heard revenue officers insist that people touch there when they don't need to, and it has also caused similar issues to you. You also aren't the first person to be caught by TfL revenue staff not understanding continuation exit. I am confident that this will get resolved. Please stay in touch with this thread. In the unlikely event that the next appeal fails then I will assist you further.

MikeWh said:

Just seen this. I'm not sure about whether it is normal to send a second appeal to a different place, but it seems legitimate. Follow the instructions and use the wording suggested. West Ham is a nightmare for people changing trains - I have heard revenue officers insist that people touch there when they don't need to, and it has also caused similar issues to you. You also aren't the first person to be caught by TfL revenue staff not understanding continuation exit. I am confident that this will get resolved. Please stay in touch with this thread. In the unlikely event that the next appeal fails then I will assist you further.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I appreciate it and will reply to the thread either way.

Also, if you know you didn't actually tap twice, don't pretend you did. If you aren't sure, say so. Just be accurate so whatever you say is consistent with their records. The 'continuation exit' argument applies whether there was one tap or two (as the system doesn't actually distinguish). I'd also mention you've sought advice after the incident and had 'continuation exit' explained to you so it doesn't look like you must have known the technicalities in advance.

Rather than berating anyone for not being accurate, I'd assume they DID tap twice, attempting to tap out then back in either on the same reader or one nearby. Those readers though wouldn't allow that within a short time which is consistent with what was described and the journey history. Revenue staff should know this quirk but as mentioned already many don't.

furlong said:

Also, if you know you didn't actually tap twice, don't pretend you did. If you aren't sure, say so. Just be accurate so whatever you say is consistent with their records. The 'continuation exit' argument applies whether there was one tap or two (as the system doesn't actually distinguish). I'd also mention you've sought advice after the incident and had 'continuation exit' explained to you so it doesn't look like you must have known the technicalities in advance.

Click to expand...

I didn't actually specifically say how many taps there were, but I suppose in my explanation it would imply one, and to be fair I don't remember 100% at this point as it was two weeks ago now and I've been going around in circles about it in my head ever since. I tried to keep it as simple and straightforward, basically stating that I believed I was doing the right thing and following station instructions to the best of my ability on the day, the machine I tapped was yellow, and I expect that if I'd just tapped out at my final station this probably would have resolved itself but I was stopped, given the penalty fare, and advised not to tap out on the day, without blaming the inspector, just as part of the course of the events. So we'll see.

anonymous2026 said:

basically stating that I believed I was doing the right thing and following station instructions to the best of my ability on the day,

Click to expand...

Which you almost certainly were as the signage on those validators leaves a lot to be desired.

anonymous2026 said:

I expect that if I'd just tapped out at my final station this probably would have resolved itself

Click to expand...

It definitely would.

anonymous2026 said:

without blaming the inspector, just as part of the course of the events. So we'll see.

Click to expand...

Well the inspector needs some re-training so hopefully your appeal will lead to that.

A thought just occurred to me, and I could be incorrect and if so I will hold my hands up, but isn’t the situation the same at Farringdon for the platform validators? Arrive on Thameslink on a paper ticket and touch the readers to start your contactless journey / arrive having already touched in for a contactless journey and touch and it just continues your journey.

If I am correct TfL have installed large posters to tell people at Farringdon when to / to not use the validators. This suggests TFL understand there is a lack of understanding about when to use such non-gateline validators. The fact the same posters have not been installed at West Ham when the situation is the same surely adds weight to the OP’s argument that they didn’t realise what they should or shouldn’t do.

Yes and we have seen a similar case resulting from an RPI inspection after an erroneous use of the platform validators at Farringdon. That was also ultimately withdrawn, which is hopefully the outcome we'll see here too.

Harratt4 said:

A thought just occurred to me, and I could’ve incorrect and if so I will hold my hands up, but isn’t the situation the same at Farringdon for the platform validators? Arrive on Thameslink on a paper ticket and touch the readers to start your contactless journey / arrive having already touched in for a contactless journey and touch and it just continues your journey.

If I am correct TfL have installed large posters to tell people at Farringdon when to / to not use the validators. This suggests TFL understand there is a lack of understanding about when to use such non-gateline validators. The fact the same posters have not been installed at West Ham when the situation is the same surely adds weight to the OP’s argument that they didn’t realise what they should or shouldn’t do.

Click to expand...

Posters are in place at Farringdon but in my view the wording is not ideal.

The wording should really say that you need to touch in/out if you are changing at Farringdon from a traditional ticket or v.v (i.e. CCST or e-ticket to pay as you go on contactless or Oyster)

I went to Kentish Town yesterday. I noticed a poster that I hadn't seen before. Still problems, the dark blue bit really shouldn't be there. And it was only next to one of the validators, not the one on the opposite side of the path. One day they'll get it right.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Aug 2026 ==

Oh joy! A friend has visited West Ham for me and taken some pictures. One of the validators is next to a huge mural/poster about not fare dodging. I'll be writing about this very shortly.

This issue seems to crop up reasonably frequently where you can change from contactless/Oyster PAYG to a traditional ticket.

Perhaps there should be a standard form of words used.

I agree. I've written up about the whole issue on my site: https://oysterfares.com/c2c-customer-given-penalty-fare-after-following-instructions/

Yes, you read that right. A customer travelled from Barking to Homerton via West Ham and Stratford. At West Ham they followed the instructions on a sign and touched their card on a validator in the subway. When they got to Homerton a revenue inspector checked their card and saw the touch out at West Ham, so they were issued with a penalty fare and prevented from touching out.

Click to expand...

I'm not quoting the whole article as it includes pictures and is quite lengthy.

@anonymous2026: Please do let us know how the second appeal goes.

Tetchytyke said:

We need to see the full tap history from the TfL website. This should include any revenue inspection taps. The app isn't clear enough for this.

Click to expand...

Tetchytyke said:

There should be two tabs: payment history and journey history. From memory the journey history tab is the one we need to see.

Click to expand...

Just for clarity, inspections are only visible for contactless travel, oyster inspections happen locally on the device. All the information is on the card. This therefore doesn't go to the back office, hence no inspection note on journey history. CPCs do, because from a RID you can't see a journey history, only if a CPC is on the blocklist and the reason, and the reconciliation of the RID tap with the journey history doesn't happen in real time, but after, when a RID inspection charge will be added to incorrectly used cards.

A RID isn't like a gate, it's the same reason as to why Apple Pay Express mode doesn't work on them, and therefore doesn't add a 'tap' onto the oyster history, as it can't write a tap to it.

MikeWh said:

I agree. I've written up about the whole issue on my site: https://oysterfares.com/c2c-customer-given-penalty-fare-after-following-instructions/

I'm not quoting the whole article as it includes pictures and is quite lengthy.

@anonymous2026: Please do let us know how the second appeal goes.

Click to expand...

Haven't gotten any sort of response yet since sending my email to them about ten days ago now. Not sure if that's a good sign or not. I'd imagine if they'd read and immediately rejected my explanation, I'd know by now. But I suppose it's equally possible that they've just not gotten to it yet, or they're actually investigating the issue and perhaps even considering steps to fix the signage issue as it's obviously a repeat issue. I'll likely reference to your article if I have to go through a final round appeal, as you explained the issue more eloquently than I as a layman (laywoman?) could.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Aug 2026 ==

Well I have an update and not a good one. I received a letter by post today stating that I did not submit payment or information within the timeframe requested and now they want £100.

This is false. I have a very clear record of the email notifying me of the first rejection on 24 July, which clearly states a response must be given online or by email within 14 days. The exact verbiage is "Any further correspondence in relation to Penalty Fare LO9280847 should be marked 2nd London Overground appeal and be received within 14 days of the above date at: Security, Policing and Enforcement at https://tfl.appealservice.co.uk or by email at AP@tfl.gov.uk. Please also ensure that you clearly state the PenaltyFare Notice number on any correspondence."

I emailed, and have proof of emailing, that email address on 4 August. As the instructions state, in my email I used that exact header (2nd London Overground appeal) and I included the LO number in the email twice, along with my full name and oyster card number.

I never received a response to that email, nor did I receive any sort of notice that the email was rejected or otherwise did not land in the inbox it was supposed to. I am now extremely frustrated that this has dragged on for a month, this is now the second time TfL and/or their associates have accused me of wrongdoing when I have complied with every policy they've made available to me. I'm also frustrated that this particular notice only came by mail, when the first notice of rejection came by email and post. The letter is dated 12 August, and yet I'm not getting to see the notice itself until a week later. Why are they changing their outreach method from week to week? Surely this purposely puts the customer at a disadvantage. I am extremely frustrated. I feel that this letter signals that my second appeal was not heard at all, and that a third appeal won't be heard either and they are now going at me for twice as much money and will likely to happily use the threat of prosecution to keep me from defending myself and the circumstances of my wrongfully issued penalty fare.

At this point, I'm prepared to submit a complaint to IRCAS site, including a screenshot of the email I received with instructions for completing a second appeal, and a screenshot of my following those steps to the letter, including the date and time that I did so. If there's any other feedback or advice before I do so tomorrow evening, I'm happy to hear it.

Others may have additional advice, but my immediate thoughts are:

What I would do is collate all the evidence of the second appeal and post it to the address on the letter, using signed for to get proof of receipt. State in the covering letter that you will expect to be compensated for all the extra costs involved in getting this wrongly issued PF overturned. Ask them to confirm that the clock did stop for the second appeal and that you are not out of time. Remind them that they have a statutory time limit to reply to an appeal and you still expect that to be respected.

Submitted my response noting my concerns by sign-for post, email, and IRCAS complaint yesterday, so we'll see. Fingers crossed. I did see that there's a couple of watchdog programmes for TFL listed on the IRCAS or maybe IAS site... I'll probably reach out to them if I don't hear anything back in the next week or so.

MikeWh said:

I agree. I've written up about the whole issue on my site: https://oysterfares.com/c2c-customer-given-penalty-fare-after-following-instructions/

I'm not quoting the whole article as it includes pictures and is quite lengthy.

Click to expand...

I note that underneath the poster referring to the "yellow" reader is a reader which is entirely covered by an advert for Chase which is not yellow.

That doesn't seem entirely passenger-friendly to me.