Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 24,738
A 'normal' would simply explain what they had done.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Hattersley - Fixed Penalty Notice
- Thread starter Paul Drury
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Same at Hadfield last time I checked. I suspect it may well be listed as it’s poor in accessibility terms.
shredder1
Established Member
Well that wouldnt be a problem, he just shows it to them??
northwichcat
Veteran Member
A Glossop to Hattersley single isn't a valid ticket for a Hattersley to Glossop journey, neither are you allowed to use the outward part of a ticket after the return part. Unless the OP had made a TOD purchase then the TVM was unable to issue the correct ticket for their journey.
shredder1
Established Member
He travelled from Hattersley station to Hadfield, why would he buy a ticket from Glossop???? .
northwichcat
Veteran Member
I thought it was Glossop, but the same point applies for Hadfield, buying to a single or return TO Hattersley would not be appropriate if you started your journey at Hattersley.
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
The old one was admittedly but the new one certainly isn't plus there are barriers. The Ticket Machine is right at the entrance and since being installed Ticketless travel even when the barriers have been open have nose dived.
The question is: Was that actually his first opportunity to purchase or simply his first opportunity to get caught?
I'm not saying either way, just pointing out what a prosecutions team would be asking.
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,465
While I appreciate it is easy to thread-drift as discussions move along, please bear in mind that the OP is seeking advice on how best to deal with his situation. Keeping these threads concise and on topic makes things easier for these forum members looking for help.
Any discussion regarding the rights and wrongs of any particular revenue protection system need to go on a separate thread. Thank you.
Any discussion regarding the rights and wrongs of any particular revenue protection system need to go on a separate thread. Thank you.
I think if a customer in this situation were completely certain that they had not missed any opportunities to pay, they could, if asked to accept a "Failure to Pay Notice", refuse. I think it's a sound approach to keep trying to tender the fare due and doing nothing else apart from explaining that this is your first oppourtunity to do so. You may find that these staff are in fact unable to accept any payments, which I know is something that happens sometimes at Northern. If explicitly asked to provide your name and address then that probably can't be avoided. I would not write them on a failure to pay notice or provide ID if asked for. The important thing then is to ensure that the fare is paid as soon as possible.
The OP was given some advice in post #2 and was then asked for further clarification in posts #3 & #4. A week later they have not replied, so my guess is that they either followed the advice or have decided to go elsewhere.
The guard will be unlikely to remember 6 months later. The guard will have had a quick turnaround at Hadfield and may be unaware of the revenue block and probably unaware that the OP had been caught so it would be unwise to rely on this.
6 months ago ? OP said it was recent..
Even so, from a tactical purpose it's worth putting northern on notice , they won't want a guard wasting a day in court on o prosecution likely to fail. But then they rely on people bring frightened to take them on. If I were the OP and the account were true there's no way I'd pay. If however I knew I'd tried it on and been caught I'd pay up n shut up . The reason we have courts is that one persons assertion that you've done something wrong does t mean that you have .
Even so, from a tactical purpose it's worth putting northern on notice , they won't want a guard wasting a day in court on o prosecution likely to fail. But then they rely on people bring frightened to take them on. If I were the OP and the account were true there's no way I'd pay. If however I knew I'd tried it on and been caught I'd pay up n shut up . The reason we have courts is that one persons assertion that you've done something wrong does t mean that you have .
By the time it goes to court and the guard called as a witness it will likely be several months.
I can totally see why the OP will see it as unjust if they just pay up. The reality is though that TOCs often win in court in similar circumstances as once a person has passed an opportunity to pay the court sees them as guilty. Is it right? Probably not but that's a separate argument. The TOCs hire clever barristers and have lots of experience prosecuting these cases. I can see this case going either way if taken to court but on the way I've seen other cases go I would see the likelihood of the OP winning as less than 50%. Remember that this forum has only heard one side to this story, a court will hear both. Magistrates may not have any knowledge of the railway and there decision making process wont be based on their opinions of Northerns revenue policy.
It will probably hinge on what the court saw the OPs intentions were when they passed the ticket window and left the station but the OP hasn't been back to say why they didn't use the ticket window.
Last edited:
Which is why the layout of this event is so crucial.
If in the passengers line of sight was a ticket office and the revenue protection staff then I would say that approaching them to buy a ticket is unlikely to allow a TOC prosecutor to show intent to avoid a fare.
On the other hand if the passenger only saw the revenue staff after walking past the ticket offence then it seems a slam dunk prosecution to me. Proactively going to them or not if the ticket office has been passed then an opportunity to purchase has been passed.
TBirdFrank
On Moderation
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2009
- Messages
- 218
To get a conviction the prosecution has to prove an intention to defraud.
Walking towards a ticket inspector with the means to pay in your hand seems to me to be a pretty fatal blow to the prosecution.
I hope he takes them all the way - but as those with a head on their shoulders on here realise - the prosecution will walk away the second they realise the game is up.
Walking towards a ticket inspector with the means to pay in your hand seems to me to be a pretty fatal blow to the prosecution.
I hope he takes them all the way - but as those with a head on their shoulders on here realise - the prosecution will walk away the second they realise the game is up.
Not if the allegation is that the offence was committed at an earlier point in time, before the OP saw the inspector.
It doesn't even depend on when they saw the inspector, they just need to have been able to see that the ticket office was open before they reached the inspector.
By that. " logic " an offence would be complete if there were 2 or more ticket booths and the first one wasn't used !
TOTAL nonsense . There were ( if ticket office was open ) two points to purchase a ticket within yards of each other .
Nope. Doesn't matter how many ticket booths / machines are present as they collectively comprise the station's ticketing facilities (and so a single opportunity to purchase). However, if the RPIs were (as suggested by the OP) beyond the station exit then that's a different matter.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Unfortunately, it's not 'TOTAL nonsense'. Please see Corbyn v Saunders [1978] 1 WLR 400, in which the Court found that there had been an opportunity to pay and that he did not take that opportunity: "when passing the ticket collector at his final destination, the requisite intention to avoid payment is proved" and that this judgement is used daily in prosecuting RoRA S.5 offences where 'any' opportunity to pay is not taken, not just 'an' opportunity.
Unfortunately, the 'several' who think that najab is 'clearly wrong' appear to be similarly unfamiliar with the jurisprudence of railway law.
Having said that, I agree with ainsworth74 that " the layout of this event is so crucial." and "If in the passengers line of sight was a ticket office and the revenue protection staff then I would say that approaching them to buy a ticket is unlikely to allow a TOC prosecutor to show intent to avoid a fare." It is 'unlikely', but not impossible, and certainly not 'TOTAL nonsense'.
He's not passed up any opportunity to pay - he tried to avail himself if the opportunity to purchase from the ticket sellers at the exit.
Good though that you appreciate ainsworths point on the realities of the actual chances of prosecution doomed to fail.
Good though that you appreciate ainsworths point on the realities of the actual chances of prosecution doomed to fail.
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
The only thing I don't get is the OP got on the service at Hattersley now the Guard has to do Doors at Dinting from the Middle so unless the OP was in the front coach which is entirely plausible He would have seen the Guard. With the shelter and seats being towards the rear of the train at Hattersley Passengers who board there tend to be in the 2 rear coaches.
TBirdFrank
On Moderation
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2009
- Messages
- 218
As a regular user of the line and who's family also use the line I can assure you that the on board staff rarely cruise the train looking for buyers, so passengers have to use barrier line staff to purchase at the city end, so why not at the country end also?
You and I appreciate the nicety of passing an open ticket office and heading for the exit, hood up, hands in pocket, which is a whole different animal than approaching RPI staff money in hand asking to pay. The crime is the intent. The OP had no intent - so no crime and no chance of a successful prosecution - but why cannot railway staff get this nicety into their heads and not create this PR disaster in the first place, or are these external staff - or New Northern which has been a PR disaster from day one!
You and I appreciate the nicety of passing an open ticket office and heading for the exit, hood up, hands in pocket, which is a whole different animal than approaching RPI staff money in hand asking to pay. The crime is the intent. The OP had no intent - so no crime and no chance of a successful prosecution - but why cannot railway staff get this nicety into their heads and not create this PR disaster in the first place, or are these external staff - or New Northern which has been a PR disaster from day one!
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
They are outsourced staff the only time Guards know where they are is when we see them and yes we do get numerous complaints about their heavy handedness, Now I will be blunt on one thing sadly that line has quite a well deserved reputation for trouble and fare evasion was rife even when we did get to them they refused to pay or we got abuse. The best thing to happen on that line was the barriers at Glossop. Fare evasion has nose dived and once machines are at every station which they will be, rumour is it could become a trial area for Penalty Fares.
TBirdFrank
On Moderation
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2009
- Messages
- 218
Couldn't agree more - the kids on this, or there again, any line are often totally out of control - never mind the "last train" types - but this still doesn't justify chasing my daughter around Piccadilly station and reducing her to tears whilst all she was trying to do was pay. Even Northern management understood that in the end - But barriers - after the morning shift is over - surely they will simply be left open, and we are back to square one. Are on board machines such an impossibility??
- Status