Search results

The figures in post 1 suggest GWR is giving credit for the fares previously paid though.

Yes, you should always stick to using the same "version" of your card on a given day. The phone and physical card are separate as far as TfL is concerned.

If you were issued a Penalty Fare and it has been paid in full, that is usually the end of the matter.

They are entitled to exclude anyone else from the interview other than a bona fide legal representative. Amongst other reasons, this would help with detecting any inconsistencies between stories, and prevent prompting.

If the card had only £1.70 on it upon arrival, which is less than the minimum fare to enter at West Ealing, then it would have been rejected for entry with a red light and two beeps. The OP has not said they got a green light and 1 beep, only that they "touched in". I think, as does MikeWh, that...

We have no control over "mums net" and whilst I'm sure nobody here is actively telling people off this forum what you're posting, this forum is publicly viewable and anything you write here could be read by a user from there.

@wongac We really need a yes/no answer to this question:

There is no chance of any of this happening. Lloyds Banking Group has signed a deal with Visa to issue Visa credit cards instead of MasterCard. As Snow1964 states above, once your replacement card arrived Lloyds will have scheduled your old card for cancellation. The letter accompanying your...

I don't suppose you exceeded the OSI time limit?

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...

Yes, an unpaid penalty fare can be pursued through county court as a civil debt after an unsuccessful appeal. And it would be correct to think that. An offence is committed by someone remaining in a first class area of a train whilst not in possession of a first class ticket or some other...

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.

I agree with this analysis. On the other hand, if an RPI proposes to issue a penalty fare, the obligation to provide name, address, and (in England) date of birth applies under regulation 13 of the Penalty Fares Regulations, and no reasonableness test arises.

Again, this is your personal assessment of "what sounds fair to me", and that's fine, but readers should not confuse it with an accurate statement of law.

Just to be absolutely clear, this may be true as a matter of customer service, but it is not true in law under the principle of nudum pactum.

If the deadline to appeal has now expired, the Penalty Fare should be paid without further delay to avoid potential court action.

A postal requisition does indeed require personal attendance at court, and a TIC (taken into consideration) agreement can only be done in person. If only a single offence had been alleged, there would usually not be a requisition and it would be done through SJP. Though every case varies.

To be clear, the result of declining to have one or more of the other 46 cases taken into consideration is that 1) compensation is not awarded that day for those journeys; and 2) TfL has to decide whether to prosecute them individually, if it is still in time to do so. Declining to have a case...

It is possible. Note however that mitigation applies only to the fine, and not to costs or compensation.

If you've experienced a ticketing issue, please start your own thread. No two cases are exactly the same, and we find that having multiple people discussing different incidents in the same thread tends to result in confusion.