Etickets

[Deerfold]

I suspect a magistrate might find you technically guilty, then not fine you anything, and order the TOC to pay costs for bringing such a silly suit to the court.

IANAL but I'd be very surprised to see a court case where someone won but had costs awarded against them (though it's not unusual for someone to win but not to have their costs awarded to the defendant if that was what you meant).

 

[cuccir]

The OP has purchased a valid ticket, and failed to display it in a format that is requested, although he/she was able to show it in another format which he/she thought was valid. Pointing this out to East Coast MAY get the demands for money and threat of prosecution removed. But...

You purchased a ticket, one of the conditions of which was that you print something on clean white paper and carry it with you. You did not, for whatever reason, comply with that condition. Therefore you did not have a valid ticket when travelling, and have committed a criminal offence under the Railway Bye-laws (which your beloved unfair terms regulations will not get in the way of)..

This is extremely important for the OP to remember. If the OP wants an easy life, and can afford it, paying the money-demanded for will make the problem go away. There's a lot to be said for this, and it's the path of least risk. On the other hand, challenge it if you want - but don't be confident that you will win.

IANAL but I'd be very surprised to see a court case where someone won but had costs awarded against them (though it's not unusual for someone to win but not to have their costs awarded to the defendant if that was what you meant).

We have seen cases reported on here when people have been found guilty (of travelling in first class for a short distance with a standard class ticket I think) but not had to pay any costs and have had a negligible fine, as the judge decided it was an easy-to-make mistake. Another judge might not have done this.

 

[Deerfold]

We have seen cases reported on here when people have been found guilty (of travelling in first class for a short distance with a standard class ticket I think) but not had to pay any costs and have had a negligible fine, as the judge decided it was an easy-to-make mistake. Another judge might not have done this.

Indeed, but not having the other side's costs having to be paid by you despite being found guilty is quite different from being found guilty and the other side having to pay your costs!

I think they've generally been magistrates rather than judges though.

 

[island]

No I don't think I am above the law whoever flamed that is out of order. I believe it is not in the public interest to prosecute people who have made honest mistakes, especially in these circumstances. If I wanted act entirely out of self interest the easiest thing to do would be to pay up. I believe I am acting in the public interest so this sort of thing doesn't happen again

Good luck.

 

[michael769]

I would suggest that people be wary about speculating as the the chances of a magistrate stepping outside their guidlines - it can happen but they are very reluctant to do it, so I would not be confortable encouraging a unrepresented defendant to rely on such avenues.

The issue in question is if the ticket presented by the OP was actully valid or not. The validity is determined by the contract - problems with the contract thus could be relevant to the criminal matter if it created reasonable doubt as to the validity of the ticket - for these reasons a civil contract can be material to criminal proceedings.

But as I already mentioned getting a maistrate to consider contract issues would be an uphill struggle, the chances of their Legal Adviser (who usually specialise in criminal law) feeling competant to advise on issues of civil contracts is not great. I would not suggest that someone rely on such an argument if they are trying to represent themselves, unless they have a lot of real life experience of presenting cases in magistrates courts. I would also urge them to ensure that they budget for the appeal costs, unless they are minded to cut and run if the maistrates rule against them.

 

[jon0844]

I don't think court is the best place to argue about whether EC is saying in some places you can have an eticket on a phone and show it, and in other places that it must be printed out... and rather odd rules about it being okay at some stations and not others.

To me, all of this can and should be resolved through customer services, then escalated from there as appropriate.

Pay the UFN, keep all receipts and records of everything that happened - then pursue things afterwards. It seems like it does need clarification, or for EC to just come up with a more common sense approach. And that's when you ask for a refund/vouchers for the value of the extra fare you paid for.

 

[Flamingo]

Can I just repeat to the OP that the previous two posts contain a lot of good advice from very knowledgable individuals with experience in railway ticketing disputes and the law.

The OP should read them carefully before deciding on a course of action.

 

[ffm]

Eticketer seems to be changing his story/excuse to fit around suggestions others have made. As a regular (at least every other week) long distance EC traveller I often have my tickets delivered as Print@Home. There is not an option for e-ticket, nor does it mention this term ANYWHERE unless/until you print out the ticket. If you click on 'more details' then it just tells you the rules about clear printing.
This part about printing the wrong ticket has only come out in the last day, and that of the trial between Berwick and York is irrelevant and added because someone mentioned it, not because Eticketer believed it before it came up here. He printed the wrong ticket and has to accept the consequences.

 

[jon0844]

I do think that it should be possible to show the barcode on a phone/tablet display though. It's how just about any other system would work.

It doesn't matter than loads of people could have the same barcode; loads of people could have a print of the same barcode. The idea is that once scanned with a barcode scanner (proper scanner or a phone camera) then it is killed, and if it has a reserved seat then nobody else could use it anyway.

This is a wider argument that goes beyond East Coast though, but one that is worthy of discussion as there have been many issues with other systems and as more TOCs encourage their use, so too will we see more people having problems.

I know that early trials appeared to work purely on trust with rail staff given no equipment to effectively check and validate codes.. and it seems like that could be the case here. At some point, this needs to be changed as whether the above story checks out or not, there are genuine flaws with a system like this if some of the necessary parts of the jigsaw are missing.

 

[soil]

Eticketer seems to be changing his story/excuse to fit around suggestions others have made. As a regular (at least every other week) long distance EC traveller I often have my tickets delivered as Print@Home. There is not an option for e-ticket, nor does it mention this term ANYWHERE unless/until you print out the ticket. If you click on 'more details' then it just tells you the rules about clear printing.
This part about printing the wrong ticket has only come out in the last day, and that of the trial between Berwick and York is irrelevant and added because someone mentioned it, not because Eticketer believed it before it came up here. He printed the wrong ticket and has to accept the consequences.

The OP signed up as 'eticketer'. While he doesn't have a full grasp of the issues, it's plainly absurd to say that the facts of this have changed, especially as he clearly described in his OP that he explained that he had printed the wrong ticket, but was able to show the correct ticket on his ipad.

Eticketer clearly has little or no knowledge of railway law, but it's obviously ridiculous to say that on the one hand his (incorrect) beliefs about the applicability of Unfair Terms regulations to ticketing matters are irrelevant and should be ignored in favour of the actual law, while on the other holding that he should not be allowed to change his understanding of the validity of Electronic Tickets on East Coast trains in view of what East Coast says.

Just as the Railway Byelaws do not change based on someone's lack of knowledge of them, equally the Electronic Ticket rules do not evaporate because you did not know about them.

 

[radamfi]

It doesn't matter than loads of people could have the same barcode; loads of people could have a print of the same barcode. The idea is that once scanned with a barcode scanner (proper scanner or a phone camera) then it is killed, and if it has a reserved seat then nobody else could use it anyway.

Given that ID needs to be produced at the same time for home printed tickets, corresponding to that in the barcode, there really is no scope for fraud. That is why home printed tickets can be used for walk up fares in some countries, and there is no reason why that can't happen in the UK. The only possible fraud is if the same person uses the same ticket twice in one day.

Home printed tickets do need to be printed out on A4 paper though in most countries that use this system, so I would guess that similar arguments have arisen there.

 

[maniacmartin]

Remember that not all barcode scanners can read barcodes from backlight screens with glare. It may be that between Berwick-u-T and York, newer (more expensive) scanners are being trialled.

I believe that the OP has been consistent with his recollection of what happened.

 

[jon0844]

I agree that barcodes can't always be read from some phone screens (having tried and failed to get barcodes scanned from a phone with an OLED screen and even the iPhone 5 - which has the Apple Passport app!!).

That might be one reason to stop the use of barcodes on phone/tablet, but that wouldn't stop someone trying to scan it and if it works then moving on.

 

[island]

I do think that it should be possible to show the barcode on a phone/tablet display though. It's how just about any other system would work.

It should be, but it isn't!

 

[soil]

It should be, but it isn't!

According to the East Coast website, it is!

 

[sheff1]

This part about printing the wrong ticket has only come out in the last day..

???

It is mentioned in the first sentence of the first post.

According to the East Coast website, it is!

.. and they actively encourage people to do so !

 

[ffm]

Oops fair comment, the way that was written I though he meant he had printed it off and it was for the wrong week, not that he had others and had selected the wrong one. Thought what was meant was the ticket had the wrong date, despite the right purchase details.

There is no encouragement to display your ticket on a phone/tablet. You get only a Print@Home link. This device display is not encouraged, promoted, or known about - perhaps except by a few who have searched for it and then only Ber to York. So no encouraging stuff there at all!

 

[Eticketer]

Eticketer seems to be changing his story/excuse to fit around suggestions others have made. As a regular (at least every other week) long distance EC traveller I often have my tickets delivered as Print@Home. There is not an option for e-ticket, nor does it mention this term ANYWHERE unless/until you print out the ticket. If you click on 'more details' then it just tells you the rules about clear printing.
This part about printing the wrong ticket has only come out in the last day, and that of the trial between Berwick and York is irrelevant and added because someone mentioned it, not because Eticketer believed it before it came up here. He printed the wrong ticket and has to accept the consequences.

Thanks but as others have said I haven't changed my story in the slightest. I thought when boarding the train that an Eticket would be valid and I still think that now. I thought the inspector was wrong when he told me east coast trains don't do Etickets and I still think that now. I said from the outset I had printed the wrong hard copy , but wasn't aware til I boarded the train when it looked like someone was sat in my seat.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oops fair comment, the way that was written I though he meant he had printed it off and it was for the wrong week, not that he had others and had selected the wrong one. Thought what was meant was the ticket had the wrong date, despite the right purchase details.

There is no encouragement to display your ticket on a phone/tablet. You get only a Print@Home link. This device display is not encouraged, promoted, or known about - perhaps except by a few who have searched for it and then only Ber to York. So no encouraging stuff there at all!

I knew that others have used Etickets as another passenger told me. I had no idea about the Berwick to York limitation, I thought Etickets were valid throughout the network. Anyway I was travelling between Berwick and York.

Reference to Eticket is on the PDF document. You don't have to print a hard copy to see that.

 

[island]

You've managed to read a lot of things, how come you weren't able to read the bit that says the ticket is only valid if printed onto clean white paper?

 

[soil]

You've managed to read a lot of things, how come you weren't able to read the bit that says the ticket is only valid if printed onto clean white paper?

I think it's obvious that eticketer followed that instruction, but by some oversight printed out the wrong ticket.

Having made this error, he attempted to use his phone/device as an Electronic Ticket, which the guard refused to accept. There are contradictory statements across various web pages relating to this, and for this reason the matter is not as straightforward as it might otherwise be.

 

[Realfish]

You've managed to read a lot of things, how come you weren't able to read the bit that says the ticket is only valid if printed onto clean white paper?

He doesn't have to print it. This is what the East Coast site says (sorry if this is repetition):

Travelling between Berwick and York? Why not use your iPhone to display your ticket

Buying your East Coast tickets online is fast, easy and great value – and you can even use your mobile phone to display the travel authorisation of your travel ticket.
If you’re travelling between Berwick and York and purchase your East Coast Advance ticket online, just choose the Print@Home option as your delivery method. Your Print@Home ticket will then be delivered to you by email as a PDF.

How your ticket works

Before your journey make sure your iPhone is fully charged or simply carry your charger with you to plug into the fitted sockets available on-board. To show your ticket to the on-board Guard during your journey, simply open the PDF on your iPhone – it contains a clever little 2D Aztec bar code which you can zoom in on, and the Guard will scan this for you.

So now you don’t have to worry about printing out a ticket and remembering to take it with you!


http://www.eastcoast.co.uk/travel-information/train-ticket-information/mobileticketing/

 

[Clip]

But why refer to it as an Eticket ( e usually understood to be electronic) at all if it's not acceptable in electronic form.

Was it deliverd to you by email? If yes then it has been delivered to you electronically has it not? Part of the T&Cs of such ticket delivered to you electronically is that you have to print it out.

Thats the basis of the ticket you held.

There is nowhere I can remember reading that states quite clearly that E-Ticket is a term solely for the use and display purposes of using your phone or tablet device.

In fact, the term M-Ticket is more commonly used for such a service to your phone or device.


I also think the terms for using your phone on the York - Berwick issue which has muddied the waters, is pretty clear that it means soley from one station to the other - not, what a lot of you are hinting at.

 

[soil]

Was it deliverd to you by email? If yes then it has been delivered to you electronically has it not? Part of the T&Cs of such ticket delivered to you electronically is that you have to print it out.

Thats the basis of the ticket you held.

There is nowhere I can remember reading that states quite clearly that E-Ticket is a term solely for the use and display purposes of using your phone or tablet device.

The Railway Byelaws and Conditions of Carriage make specific reference to 'Electronic Ticket', and provide that such a ticket can be stored on a smartcard, phone, PDA, laptop or similar device. A printed ticket would not constitute an 'Electronic Ticket'

The East Coast website also makes specific reference to 'Electronic Ticket' (as distinct from e-ticket or anything else), which suggests that they understand this.

In fact, the term M-Ticket is more commonly used for such a service to your phone or device.

This term has no specific meaning, unlike 'Electronic Ticket'.

 

[Clip]

Yes but it does not specifically state that the term E- Ticket refers to it being as such which is the point I was making.

The M- Ticket term does not have any specific meaning yes, but again its used for the purposes of a ticket veing valid by being viewed/scanned on your Mobile device.

 

[Royston Vasey]

Thanks but as others have said I haven't changed my story in the slightest. I thought when boarding the train that an Eticket would be valid and I still think that now. I thought the inspector was wrong when he told me east coast trains don't do Etickets and I still think that now. I said from the outset I had printed the wrong hard copy , but wasn't aware til I boarded the train when it looked like someone was sat in my seat.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I knew that others have used Etickets as another passenger told me. I had no idea about the Berwick to York limitation, I thought Etickets were valid throughout the network. Anyway I was travelling between Berwick and York.

Reference to Eticket is on the PDF document. You don't have to print a hard copy to see that.

No matter how many times you repeat the word Eticket, or give it a capital letter, it doesn't change the fact that it is not used by East Coast. Absolutely no references can be found on East Coast's website, the only four results it brings up ALL refer to "Print@Home" only. I hardly think you can claim that that is a misleading term. You knew what a Print@Home ticket involved (hence you printed at home) but you made a mistake.

Even if they had used the word, you can't claim that it's a universal term with a clear meaning, it just isn't. You're just interpreting it to have a favourable meaning to your crusade because you feel it's an unfair penalty. Also you know fine well you're deliberately misinterpreting the phrase "between Berwick and York".

I got a parking ticket yesterday as I misread the signage. A mistake, but strict liability means the warden needed no proof of intent to park illegally. I accepted the fine with a sigh and some good grace. Move on, is this really worth your time??

 

[jon0844]

I don't know if there's any official definition of an e-ticket or m-ticket. I get them for flying and airlines give me the option to print or show the barcode on screen.

Some airlines allow NFC to be used. Will these be called n-tickets or c-tickets [contactless]? I am sure they'll be given different names by different companies.

 

[34D]

Can't offer anything to the thread I don't think, but its a good read and I'm interested to hear how this pans out.

A letter to customer services, appealing to their better nature, is certainly one strategy.

Paying RPSS then requesting reimbursement from customer services, potentially recovering monies through a civil (small claims court) claim is another

As is letting them take you to the magistrates court. Legal advice recommended I think

 

[Eticketer]

No matter how many times you repeat the word Eticket, or give it a capital letter, it doesn't change the fact that it is not used by East Coast. Absolutely no references can be found on East Coast's website, the only four results it brings up ALL refer to "Print@Home" only. I hardly think you can claim that that is a misleading term. You knew what a Print@Home ticket involved (hence you printed at home) but you made a mistake.

Even if they had used the word, you can't claim that it's a universal term with a clear meaning, it just isn't. You're just interpreting it to have a favourable meaning to your crusade because you feel it's an unfair penalty. Also you know fine well you're deliberately misinterpreting the phrase "between Berwick and York".

I got a parking ticket yesterday as I misread the signage. A mistake, but strict liability means the warden needed no proof of intent to park illegally. I accepted the fine with a sigh and some good grace. Move on, is this really worth your time??

I have agreed with the mod that we should shortly be winding this thread up as even I am starting to lose a little interest , although some and indeed most of the contributors have been very helpful, for which many thanks.

Even I can't find PRINT@home ambiguous? Well what about printing to PDF? And what if I print at the office? Reference to ETicket is made in capital letters the seemingly contradictory conditions are in small print. Effectively what some people seem to say is that the conditions of this Eticket are that it is not an Eticket which I am sorry I find very confusing and odd.

I have tried writing to EC customers service but they say they can't get involved as I have had an unpaid fare notice. It does seem a strange setup that any company state owned or not should give their customers such an experience.

And no the travelling between Berwick and York doesn't just mean travelling between Berwick and York you are wrong I am afraid.

There are one or two other developments I will mention to the mod but otherwise as I say we will shortly be winding this up and thanks to nearly everyone for their contributions. I will come back when there is significant update.

 

[island]

And no the travelling between Berwick and York doesn't just mean travelling between Berwick and York you are wrong I am afraid.

This sentence, I regret to say, sums up the tenuousness and confused nature of your argument. "Travelling between Berwick and York doesn't mean travelling between Berwick and York." What on earth does it mean then? Travelling between Lerwick and Cork? Travelling to Fenwicks to buy Pork?

 

[Eticketer]

This sentence, I regret to say, sums up the tenuousness and confused nature of your argument. "Travelling between Berwick and York doesn't mean travelling between Berwick and York." What on earth does it mean then? Travelling between Lerwick and Cork? Travelling to Fenwicks to buy Pork?

Island can you tone it down a bit please I find your posts unduly aggressive and I don't want to involve the mods. As the late Michael winner would say calm down dear.

Travelling between Berwick and York does not just mean starting your journey at Berwick and ending it at York. The example on the EC website includes a Snap of a ticket from Darlington. Which is travelling in the opposite direction and starting at an intermediate station.

If it said "if you are travelling between Berwick and York" it will only cost £10 then I would agree it would be unreasonable to infer that if you are traveling between Edinburgh and London it would still only cost £10 just because it involves travelling between Berwick and york.

But if you've paid for an Edinburgh to London ticket why can't you show your Eticket between Berwick and York?

Now I know ECs hardball stance I agree that's very likely not what they mean but it just isn't clear.

And fact remains the inspector was clearly unaware of this even though we were travelling between York and berwick at the time. If the inspector doesn't know the rules how can customers be expected to?