Challenging a Fare Demand

[Simon321456]

Hi there

I messed up the title and can't edit

I've got a demand for £83.80 to pay. £23.80 ticket fee, plus 3x £20 admin charges

I was caught without a ticket in January, and successfully appealed against the fine. However they insisted I had to pay £23.80 for the cost of the ticket

I have so far refused, as on the day I got issued the fine I bought a return ticket to cover the journey in question

I have replied to each of their demands for payment, each adding a further £20 fine and have had no response to my letter aside from a further letter with again, a further £20 fine.

This last letter is advising that legal proceedings have commenced

I really want to go to court and fight this. It is completely stupid that I should have to pay them £23.80 when I already bought a ticket that day

Thoughts?

Thanks

 

[bb21]

Can you provide some more details of your case, such as what ticket you bought, exactly what happened on the day, what was said when you encountered the RPIs, etc?

 

[Simon321456]

Certainly!

Boarded at Aldrington without a ticket as machine not working
Booth on platform @ Brighton closed. Not enough time to exit barriers and queue for tickets so boarded train to Victoria (my stop Clapham Junction)
Advised ticket inspector of the above, wouldn't sell me a ticket and issued penalty fare (£47.60, twice ticket charge)
Appealed, penalty fare rescinded but they demanded the original fare be paid
Tried to appeal, was unsuccessful

Since then they have sent letters to me, I've replied but they haven't been acknowledged and presumably the next step is to go to court

 

[bb21]

You say that you had already bought a ticket. What do you mean by that? When and where did you buy that ticket?

 

[Simon321456]

I had to get home that same day, so I bought a return ticket (as opposed to a single) later that day

I guess this is the crux of my argument, that I had a valid ticket and therefore there can't possibly be any fare evasion intent

I mean I don't really WANT to go to court, but I'm livid at the charges and am willing to challenge them. Of course a criminal record isn't something I'm particularly interested in, nor is a far greater monetary penalty; but still

 

[bb21]

A tricky one I think.

To a large extent I agree that had you not been incorrectly issued a Penalty Fare and just sold the ticket you required, you would have paid the same as that for the ticket you later bought.

Have they advised you what legislation they are considering using?

 

[Greenback]

I agree that it would not be fair for you to have paid for the same journey twice. presumably the TCO have accpeted that there were no ticket facilities available when you boarded the train and that there were no grounds to issue a PF because of this.

Have you provided them with a copy of the ticket you bought on the day?

 

[tony6499]

Did you buy an Aldrington to Clapham Junction return ? Have you still got this ticket ?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I had to get home that same day, so I bought a return ticket (as opposed to a single) later that day . . . .

You cannot demonstrate that a ticket which was bought later in the day was the ticket which authorised travel earlier in the day.

The reasoning is that the ticket is merely evidence of a Contract having been formed between a Railway Company and a passenger - a Contract which authorises one or more journeys in the present or in the future. That contract does not authorise an action which has already been completed.

Anyway, as for the question of "intent"

I guess this is the crux of my argument, that I had a valid ticket and therefore there can't possibly be any fare evasion intent . . .

Just imagine trying to differentiate a determined fare evader from a passenger 'running late' but who agrees to buy a ticket after travelling when challenged! You wouldn't be able to tell the difference - everyone would just pay when challenged and there would be no disincentive to avoid buying tickets before travel; in fact we could guess that less and less people would ever bother paying in advance. But I realise that this might not be of concern to you at present. The point is that "intent" is demonstrated by failing to take any one opportunity to pay; and that paying after the event when challenged cannot negate "intent".

You can continue to plea with the Company to accept your retrospective ticket, a ticket which presumably wasn't then used for a journey after having bought it. But . . .

I really want to go to court and fight this. It is completely stupid that I should have to pay them £23.80 when I already bought a ticket that day

If you do let this go to a Court, I'm intrigued to know what defence you might have which counters the Company's claim that, either, you "travelled without having previously paid his fare" (RoRA S.5), or, "no person shall enter a train for the purpose of travelling unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel" (Byelaw 18). Being "completely stupid" would not be an adequate defence. And having "already bought a ticket that day" is not nearly good enough to satisfy a passengers legal obligation when that ticket was bought later in the day.

 

[Greenback]

Dave, what would you say would be the best course of action to take in the OP's circumstances? As I read it, there was no opportunity to purchase a ticket

He wasn't able to purchase a ticket at the originating station due to the machine not working
He did not have time at the interchange without missing his connection
He was not able to purchase on board and, instead was given a Penalty Fare

Should he have bought a single ticket to get back, and then paid the difference between that and the return fare when appealing the PF? Or something else?

 

[SickyNicky]

Surely the point of this is that the OP had NO opportunity to buy a ticket before the ticket check?

Edit: Grrr - beaten to it by Greenback.

 

[maniacmartin]

Also beaten to it by Greenback!

 

[Simon321456]

They don't specifically state, but on the 'NOTIFICATION OF ALLEGED FARE EVASION' it states:

Contrary to Section 5.3.a of the Regulation of Railway Act 1889

That's not great news is it?

I don't have the ticket anymore, but I did provide it to them.
They actually cancelled the PF due to the guy stating 2013 instead of 2014

Actually I should have mentioned this, but the ticket I bought afterwards only covered me to Hove, not Aldrington. This is because the train I was on (ie the return leg) didn't go to Aldrington. This was obviously a bit silly. Enough to warrant this entire conversation invalid and I should just pay up?



In answer to Geordie Dave, I totally agree with what you're saying WRT fare evaders and the difficulties rail operatives face, but that doesn't detract from the scenario in question. I could not buy a ticket, facilities weren't available

Regardless though, as I said the actual PF notice was cancelled, and the monies outstanding due to the original ticket needing to be purchased. Seems in trying to be honest, I've somehow cost myself a pretty packet!

 

[bb21]

I think this just complicated your arguments massively. It somewhat invalidates your claim that you had already paid the correct fare as you still don't have a valid ticket for your outward journey.

Although I think you have been treated harshly to a certain extent with the mix-up, I fear that you may not have many alternative options realistically speaking other than paying up.

A Section 5 charge, if convicted, will result in a criminal record. Your repeated refusal to pay the correct fare (as things stand) can quite be easily used to demonstrate "intent" unfortunately.

Should he have bought a single ticket to get back, and then paid the difference between that and the return fare when appealing the PF? Or something else?

I suspect that the best course of action at the time may well have been to purchase the ticket from Aldrington at Clapham Junction ticket office, given that a Penalty Fare (which remained NIL paid I suspect?) issued under such circumstances were almost certain to be quashed.

 

[Haywain]

If the OP had paid the amount of the ticket when it was requested, the company might have been sympathetic to a request for a refund on the ticket that was purchased later in the day (or the difference between the two amounts paid and the return fare, subject to admin fee). As it is, I cannot imagine that they will be willing to consider that now.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Dave, what would you say would be the best course of action to take in the OP's circumstances? As I read it, there was no opportunity to purchase a ticket

I think it reasonable for him to continue to plea with the Company (but I've advised against the urge "to fight it in Court"). The correct action was to accept the Company's request thaat he pays the £23.80 for the ticket, retrospectively, and thus regularising the situation (and not buying another ticket later in the day, perhaps for a different journey, and which was presented as a payment for a journey already taken.

I hesitate to define exactly the best thing to have done due to lack of detailled circumstances, but it seems to me that there was an offer at some point to pay the £23.80 which the passenger refused, and that was the trigger for the subsequent action which is now looking at Court proceedings along strict lines of argument.

Surely the point of this is that the OP had NO opportunity to buy a ticket before the ticket check?

But he was given an opportunity later. He refused, and still refuses.

Edit: Grrr - beaten to it by Greenback.

Lets not be competitive. Greenback just happened to have a spare moment while you will have had had something much more important to attend to!

 

[Simon321456]

Being completely honest, and after reading many different posts on this forum, I think that it would be foolish to allow it to go to court

I'm still really annoyed, and think I've been very harshly treated; but I can see the other side of the coin

What is infuriating is that this is/was a genuine, I can't even call it an error! I could not have purchased a ticket before travelling



Chances of reclaiming any of the admin fees back?

 

[Simon321456]

But he was given an opportunity later. He refused, and still refuses.

On the grounds that I had purchased a ticket that same day! I was/am refusing to buy ANOTHER ticket for the same journey.

 

[bb21]

Chances of reclaiming any of the admin fees back?

Eh? They are not asking for any admin fees AFAIK.

However now that the matter has proceeded further I am not sure whether they will be willing to drop it without some costs being covered.

 

[Simon321456]

Eh? They are not asking for any admin fees AFAIK.

However now that the matter has proceeded further I am not sure whether they will be willing to drop it without some costs being covered.

They're asking for £83.80, made up of:

£23.80 original fare
3x £20 admin charges for sending out each letter (I think!)

 

[bb21]

OK, sorry I got a little confused. I thought they had rescinded the admin charges after your appeal.

It really is up to you. Obviously paying it is the easily way out, and going to court, as you admit yourself, is not likely to be a good option.

Perhaps it is worth giving them a ring and discussing the matter over the phone personally. They may be willing to reduce the admin charge, but at the same time, as the matter has progressed it is also possible that they may ask for more in order to drop the case. Depends on how much you want to avoid it going any further I guess.

 

[Simon321456]

I'll give that a whirl. Does state that the operator is only able to take payment, and not discuss any aspects of the issue on this letter though.

Really quite gutted I didn't discover this place sooner!

 

[Greenback]

I suspect that the best course of action at the time may well have been to purchase the ticket from Aldrington at Clapham Junction ticket office, given that a Penalty Fare (which remained NIL paid I suspect?) issued under such circumstances were almost certain to be quashed.

Yes, I agree. After thinking about it a bit more, that seems to cover everything.

I think, in the absence of any ticket covering the whole journey, it would be unwise to have a day in court, and I would agree that contacting them by phone and trying to bring things to a conclusion that way. I fear that, unfair as it may be, the OP may have to bite the bullet here.

 

[bb21]

I'll give that a whirl. Does state that the operator is only able to take payment, and not discuss any aspects of the issue on this letter though.

Really quite gutted I didn't discover this place sooner!

Where is this letter from? Is it from Southern or is it from IPFAS/RPSS?

 

[Simon321456]

Where is this letter from? Is it from Southern or is it from IPFAS/RPSS?

RPSS, with a PO box address in Portsmouth

Apparently the matter is now subjudice too, so any discussions can only be entered in writing. Apparently

 

[bb21]

Ah, that explains it. RPSS are effectively a debt collector.

If you are happy to pay the £83, then I think that would be the end of the matter. It is much less flexible if handled by RPSS than if still handled by Southern themselves.

 

[Llanigraham]

RPSS, with a PO box address in Portsmouth

Apparently the matter is now subjudice too, so any discussions can only be entered in writing. Apparently

If it is subjudice why are you discussing it here?
Thread reported to Mods.

 

[Simon321456]

Ah, that explains it. RPSS are effectively a debt collector.

If you are happy to pay the £83, then I think that would be the end of the matter. It is much less flexible if handled by RPSS than if still handled by Southern themselves.

I'm not! Not at all, but I don't want the situation to get any worse, and it seems like unless the company in question suddenly develops an unlikely sympathetic tendency, I'm going to lose, despite what appears to be an injustice

If it is subjudice why are you discussing it here?
Thread reported to Mods.

I think they're probably already aware of it...

 

[Fare-Cop]

If it is subjudice why are you discussing it here?
Thread reported to Mods.

I think it can be observed by anyone applying real thought to the thread that the OP is merely A.N.Other seeking advice regarding an unspecified incident

A journey is identified,

no date is identified,
no penalty notice number is identified
no staff names are identified,
no defendant name is identified.
no summons reference is identified

There is nothing prejudicial in this thread in a subjudicial sense.

 

[34D]

Ah, that explains it. RPSS are effectively a debt collector.

If you are happy to pay the £83, then I think that would be the end of the matter. It is much less flexible if handled by RPSS than if still handled by Southern themselves.

A letter to Southern (potentially addressed to Chris Burchell, Managing Director) could be worth a shot.

Keep it concise, emphasise that you didn't have an opportunity to pay before the RPI, and that given he didn't offer the full range of tickets to you you purchased the best return ticket you could from Clapham Junction.