Odd Penalty Fare - any thoughts please?

[ricardovich]

Hi Everyone

Anyone got any thoughts on this:-

I work on matchdays at a football stadium. I travel 3 stops to the stadium on Southern Trains and have done so for the past 4 years. In all this time, myself and my colleagues have traveled to-and-from the stadium without buying a ticket but by simply showing our staff passes. This has never been queried nor been denied as valid means of travel in the past.

Earlier this month I traveled to the stadium with colleagues as usual. At the stadium station were were denied exit through the barriers and were told our staff passes were "no longer valid for travel" and that we were all to be issued with Penalty Fare Notices (PFN) and a £20 fine. We explained the previous situation but were denied any further passage. We offered to pay the full fare (£5.90), which I believe is our statutory right under the Penalty Fares Rules 2002 section 8 (2)(?) but this option was denied too.

I have appealed to IPFAS on the grounds that I was under the belief that I had a valid authorisation to travel and could show precident over a number of years (and most recently 7 days before the date of PFN issue) that this authorisation had been accepted as such. I had been given no warning that this authorisation would no longer be deemed as valid.

I have received a letter today from IPFAS stating that my appeal has been unsuccessful and that I now owe £40.

There's a paragraph in the letter that reads:-
"Whilst I understand there was no intention to avoid payment of the fare due, because the staff pass produced for inspection is not valid for the journey whatsoever, the penalty fare was issued correctly".

It seems to me that on one hand they are saying they agree I had no intention to avoid payment, however, on the other hand they were correct to issue the Penalty Fare which is used to penalise people who intentionally avoid payment - !?!?! PS - cough up £40. Grrr

Anyone got any thoughts on this and whether I should/could take it further??

Thanks

Rich

 

[ainsworth74]

Just for clarity the staff pass shows you work at the football ground and isn't a railway staff pass (like you would have if you were an employee of a train company)?

 

[Anvil1984]

There's a paragraph in the letter that reads:-
"Whilst I understand there was no intention to avoid payment of the fare due, because the staff pass produced for inspection is not valid for the journey whatsoever, the penalty fare was issued correctly".

It seems to me that on one hand they are saying they agree I had no intention to avoid payment, however, on the other hand they were correct to issue the Penalty Fare which is used to penalise people who intentionally avoid payment - !?!?! PS - cough up £40. Grrr

Anyone got any thoughts on this and whether I should/could take it further??

Thanks

Rich

Penalty Fares are not for intentional avoiding fare they are for honest mistakes. Intentional non payment can be dealt with in court. If there is no agreement between the club and train company I cant see how this can be dealt with any other way

Also you mention rule 8.2 alleging you can pay the full on the day fare instead of a penalty fare. 8.2 says nothing of the kind

8.2 The authorised collector may require that person to make a
minimum payment that is equal to the full single fare which
they would have had to pay for their journey if penalty fares
had not applied. The person must be given 21 days to pay the
rest of the penalty fare, starting on the day that penalty fare is
charged. If the penalty fare is not paid in full immediately, it
must be paid in any way that is set out in the notice referred to
in rule 8.3

It would be the fare on the day plus the remainder of penalty fare on top and its not a right to be allowed to pay that due to the word "may"

 

[455driver]

Why would a football ground pass be valid for train travel?
Was there an agreement in place which has lapsed, or did the staff think it was a railstaff pass you were using.
Where you told when you started that the pass was valid for train travel?
Is it written on the pass that it is valid for train travel?
If you add up all the fares you have saved you are still well in front!

You should have paid the penalty fare and then appealed, that would have prevented it escalating to £40.

 

[telstarbox]

Southern allow free travel for fans between Brighton and Falmer (for the Amex) on match days - perhaps this unofficially extends to staff?

 

[cuccir]

Can you find any supporting documentation telling you about this agreement between the railway company and the football club? If you do - and you have not been informed about this being rescinded - then you might appeal this Penalty Fare, but I would write to both Southern and IPFAS together.

If on the other hand it's been an informal agreement between local staff and the company then I'm afraid that while a bit annoying, it would be hard for you to have any legal basis for your challenge. Paying £40 is annoying, but it's better paid now. You could consider it a £40 payment for all the free travel over the years....

Even if you pay, contact your employers/Southern about this - there may have been a breakdown in communication between the two which could lead to you getting the Penalty Fare back.

 

[ricardovich]

Thanks for all your replies and advice.

Just to clarify a number of things - yes it's the football stadium staff pass and no it does not say that it is a rail pass. HOWEVER, (and I think this is the crux of my grievance) as stated, for nearly 4 years we have been travelling on this pass without ever being told we were doing anything wrong. Indeed, as it is not a rail ticket, we have always had to show it to a member of staff at a barrier and they have simply opened the barriers at both ends and let us through.

If, as Southern are now maintaining, this agreement was never official then I accept that - FROM NOW ON. However, I feel aggrieved that we were never told that this tacit authorisation had come to an end. There were no signs up to tell us of this, no member of rail staff had ever communicated this to us and, indeed, as I have said, we used the staff passes with no problem the week before, AND, on the day in question, we were waved through the barriers at our starting station before being penalized at our destination. When I queried that with the Penalty issuer he simply said "well I don't know what they get up to at that station, do I?".

It seems unjust to me that Penalty Fares were issued without any warning to the change in policy and where I have years of empirical evidence that these staff passes were accepted as authorisation to travel.

Could someone explain to me what the difference between a Penalty Fare and a Fine is and what happens if I write back still refuting their decision?

Thanks again

R.

 

[Squaddie]

We offered to pay the full fare (£5.90), which I believe is our statutory right under the Penalty Fares Rules 2002 section 8 (2)(?) but this option was denied too.

I don't think there is any statutory right to pay only the fare due when challenged, otherwise there would be no incentive for anyone ever to pay a train fare.

Section 8.2 of the penalty fare rules says:

The authorised collector may require that person to make a minimum payment that is equal to the full single fare which they would have had to pay for their journey if penalty fares had not applied. The person must be given 21 days to pay the rest of the penalty fare, starting on the day that penalty fare is charged.

This makes it clear that although you may, if you wish, only pay the fare due on the spot, the passenger is still required to pay the remainder of the penalty fare.

 

[najaB]

Could someone explain to me what the difference between a Penalty Fare and a Fine is...?

As I understand it, a Penalty Fare is a higher than normal fare that is charged when a passenger is in contravention of ticketing regulations. A penalty fare is not issued as a punishment, and is a civil matter between the TOC and the passenger.

A fine is a penalty that is assessed and imposed by a magistrate or judge when a defendant is found guilty of an offence.

 

[Class377]

Why would a football ground pass be valid for train travel?
Was there an agreement in place which has lapsed, or did the staff think it was a railstaff pass you were using.
Where you told when you started that the pass was valid for train travel?
Is it written on the pass that it is valid for train travel?
If you add up all the fares you have saved you are still well in front!

You should have paid the penalty fare and then appealed, that would have prevented it escalating to £40.

Something tells me this is Brighton & Hove Albion, who have an agreement with Southern to allow supporters free travel within the local area. I imagine this extends to the ground staff as well?

If this is the case, he is not "well in front" as it would be what he is entitled to?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A quick Google said:-

For fixtures at the Amex outside of the Championship
league program, your match ticket will indicate whether
free travel is included or not, so please be sure to check
before making travel arrangements

Was it indeed out of the Championship League and thus possibly not included?

FWIW I think it's an excellent scheme - very European! Would love to see more of the same, with matchday, theatre tickets and hotel bookings including local rail and bus travel in the price as is near enough standard in Germany, Switzerland etc.

Neil

 

[ricardovich]

A quick Google said:-



Was it indeed out of the Championship League and thus possibly not included?



Neil

No it was within the Championship scheme.

I feel they were very heavy handed with the whole thing. If they were reasonable I think they should have stopped everyone on the day using their staff passes and told them that the agreement no longer existed between the football club and Southern. That way, should anyone still try to use the passes in future they would have every right to penalize them.

Talking of reasonable - my issue is that I had reasonable expectation that I had authority to travel given that I had always been able to do so in the past and that Southern had not informed me of a change to this authority.

 

[bb21]

I am still a little confused. Was there or was there no agreement between the club and Southern to allow free travel to staff on matchdays? If so, is that facility for league games only?

I find it bizarre that such a facility could be withdrawn part-way through a season so if the arrangement indeed exists, I would expect it to be relatively straight-forward to obtain written confirmation from the club.

If this was all unofficial and a "wink and nod" arrangement, then the Penalty Fare was correctly issued, and refusing to pay it could see it withdrawn and a court summons issued. In that case, I cannot see how you can have any ground for complaint.

As is, if you wish to appeal, then you had better pay it and then initiate the appeals process, as otherwise they will just keep adding fees on top. If you are absolutely certain that the Penalty Fare was incorrectly issued, then fight it, but I am unable to say either way what the situation is from available information so far.

As for the issue of "intent", Penalty Fares are not the correct course of action for anybody suspected of deliberately trying to avoid paying the correct fare. Prosecution would be the correct course of action. Subsequently conviction can see a court imposing a fine, amongst other measures. A Penalty Fare, as the name suggests, is a fare that is of an amount higher than normal, and issued when no deliberate foul-play is suspected. This leaflet should make it clear the purpose of these "fares", particularly Question 15.

 

[tony6499]

Since Brighton started playing at the AMEX and indeed before that at Withdean a match/season ticket included travel in the zone between Shoreham - Haywards Heath - Seaford.

There have never been any arrangements for staff at the AMEX to travel free unless of course they had a ticket for the match or had a season ticket. Whether certain people have been 'blagging' it by showing a pass and hoping it was taken for a season ticket I can't say but there has never been any arrangement for staff to go free.

From time to time memos were sent out reminding staff of the validity of the zones and the season tickets and what times they were valid after matches etc and at no time was any kind of gratis AMEX staff mentioned.

 

[ricardovich]

As for the issue of "intent", Penalty Fares are not the correct course of action for anybody suspected of deliberately trying to avoid paying the correct fare. Prosecution would be the correct course of action. Subsequently conviction can see a court imposing a fine, amongst other measures. A Penalty Fare, as the name suggests, is a fare that is of an amount higher than normal, and issued when no deliberate foul-play is suspected. This leaflet should make it clear the purpose of these "fares", particularly Question 15.

Thanks for this. So moving these thoughts on (and having read that leaflet):-

"A penalty fare (...) is not a fine and anyone who
is charged one is not being accused of avoiding, or
attempting to avoid, paying his or her fare"

So as no criminal offence has been committed I cannot be prosecuted. Indeed, The Penalty Fares Regulations 1994 state that "the recovery of a penalty fare is a civil debt". Thus, in order to recover their money the train company would have to sue me. This would seem a huge waste of time and resources for such a small amount - indeed one industry lawyer has stated:-
"There has been no reported case of a train company suing in this way - the last thing the rail industry would want is a pronouncement by a judge on its levying of penalty fares." Unless you guys know different??

Has a train company ever sued anyone for recovery of a £20/£40 penalty??

 

[bb21]

You are correct that the issue of Penalty Fare is a civil matter.

What you may not be aware of is that you were also in breach of the Railway Byelaws (Condition 18), which is what you will likely be charged under. This is a criminal matter and there is very little defence provided that you were unable to present a valid ticket on demand (which from what you have described is true).

Byelaw 18 is currently a preferred option for many train companies for the precise reason that it is very difficult to argue against.

 

[najaB]

So as no criminal offence has been committed I cannot be prosecuted....

Beware. This way madness lies.

A criminal offence is committed if a passenger "enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway [without] a valid ticket entitling him to travel" - a penalty fare is the TOCs way of acknowledging that there was no intent to avoid the fare.

 

[Paul Kelly]

Re: the discussion on the meaning of the phrase "The authorised collector may require that person to make a minimum payment", I read that not as an option for the collector to be more lenient, but as an option for them to be more harsh (i.e. they may require a minimum payment to be made, but don't have to).

As far as I can see, if the collector doesn't require a minimum payment to be made at the time, then there is nothing to be paid at the time; the fare must simply be paid within 21 days.

 

[tony6499]

To the OP do you have documentation from the football club saying that your staff passes were valid for free travel or who told you ?

 

[455driver]

So as no criminal offence has been committed I cannot be prosecuted.

Actually an offence has been commited (Railway byelaw 18(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.)
See section 18 of this-
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf

But the rail company have decided that it was probably done accidentally so have offered you the option of a (higher) penalty fare which, if paid, will set aside the offence. Failure to pay the PF will result in its withdrawal and a prosecution under section 18, probably 18(2) and/or 18(1) which although not carrying a criminal record will result in a much higher penalty (actually a fine in the true sense of the word).

Has a train company ever sued anyone for recovery of a £20/£40 penalty??

No but they have withdrawn the PF and then prosecuted people for byelaw offences which are an easy option as they are strict liability, you were asked for a ticket and couldnt provide one, therefore you are guilty of (at least byelaw 18(2)!

Dont let your feelings of injustice cloud your judgement, you are guilty even if you dont like it.

 

[Class377]

I believe your best option would be to simply pay the penalty fare (as mentioned on here, they won't sue you to get that, they'll just revoke it and prosecute) and, if there is an agreement to provide free travel, raise hell with the club.

It may also be worth posting this on North Stand Chat, as there may well be some other Brighton staff posting on there alongside the fans.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The validity of your 'staff pass' is either true or false, and without all the Terms and Conditions agreed by both parties, then I simply cannot comment on that.

However, I might be able to help with this:-

. . . . HOWEVER, (and I think this is the crux of my grievance) as stated, for nearly 4 years we have been travelling on this pass without ever being told we were doing anything wrong. Indeed, as it is not a rail ticket, we have always had to show it to a member of staff at a barrier and they have simply opened the barriers at both ends and let us through. . . . .

. . . . If they were reasonable I think they should have stopped everyone on the day using their staff passes and told them that the agreement no longer existed between the football club and Southern. That way, should anyone still try to use the passes in future they would have every right to penalize them.

Talking of reasonable - my issue is that I had reasonable expectation that I had authority to travel given that I had always been able to do so in the past and that Southern had not informed me of a change to this authority.

What you seem to be arguing is that established 'custom and practice' has some weight when assessing the validity of some forms of rail travel. You are correct, it does. Some of it is well documented, some is poorly documented, and some is entirely rooted in daily practice.

It will be helpful to be clear about which of these three categories your incident falls into.

Others have asked if your arrangement is a written agreement or not. I was not persuaded that it is. If it is, then your first duty would simply be to provide the evidence agreed by both parties which confirms your right to travel without paying a fare.

Failing that, your next duty would be to establish the binding force of the 'custom and practice' on which you are relying. That too must be evidential - preferably a written agreement, perhaps a statement by the party which has waived its rights (i.e. a Railway Company).

Lastly, you could try to provide some ad hoc evidence in the form of a statement made by a person of authority in the Railway Company which confirms the permission to travel without payment.

What you must not do is persist in your presumption that an irregular practice is automatically authorised simply by virtue of its repetition. It is not.

 

[Llanigraham]

Ignore Dave's advice in the last sentence above at your peril.

I would suggest paying the Penalty Fare forthwith and then pursue Dave's other comments.

 

[ricardovich]

The validity of your 'staff pass' is either true or false, and without all the Terms and Conditions agreed by both parties, then I simply cannot comment on that.

However, I might be able to help with this:-

What you seem to be arguing is that established 'custom and practice' has some weight when assessing the validity of some forms of rail travel. You are correct, it does. Some of it is well documented, some is poorly documented, and some is entirely rooted in daily practice.

It will be helpful to be clear about which of these three categories your incident falls into.

Others have asked if your arrangement is a written agreement or not. I was not persuaded that it is. If it is, then your first duty would simply be to provide the evidence agreed by both parties which confirms your right to travel without paying a fare.

Failing that, your next duty would be to establish the binding force of the 'custom and practice' on which you are relying. That too must be evidential - preferably a written agreement, perhaps a statement by the party which has waived its rights (i.e. a Railway Company).

Lastly, you could try to provide some ad hoc evidence in the form of a statement made by a person of authority in the Railway Company which confirms the permission to travel without payment.

What you must not do is persist in your presumption that an irregular practice is automatically authorised simply by virtue of its repetition. It is not.

Brilliant - thanks so much.

Just finally (!!) - where do you think I stand with regard that the gate inspector at Brighton station looked at my staff pass and opened the barrier for me to travel on the train? He obviously thought I had authorisation to travel. 12 minutes later I'm issued a Penalty Fare from a different member of staff at a different station. Unfortunately (and obviously) I did not take a record of the Brighton employee's name nor number, however, I could not have travelled on that train if he had not let me/us through.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You are correct that the issue of Penalty Fare is a civil matter.

What you may not be aware of is that you were also in breach of the Railway Byelaws (Condition 18), which is what you will likely be charged under. This is a criminal matter and there is very little defence provided that you were unable to present a valid ticket on demand (which from what you have described is true).

Byelaw 18 is currently a preferred option for many train companies for the precise reason that it is very difficult to argue against.

Thanks so much for this - however - as stated above - a ticket inspector at Brighton station looked at our passes and opened the barrier for us to travel.

Surely I can argue under Railway Byelaws (condition 18):-

(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a
valid ticket.

??

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . where do you think I stand with regard that the gate inspector at Brighton station looked at my staff pass and opened the barrier for me to travel on the train?


. . . . - a ticket inspector at Brighton station looked at our passes and opened the barrier for us to travel.

Surely I can argue under Railway Byelaws (condition 18):-

(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a
valid ticket.

Don't be too distracted by this from the course of action I outlined for you.

That inspector's opening of the gate is not conclusive, it is not written and it is not confirmed.
What you need to do IF YOUR PASS DOES PERMIT FREE TRAVEL, is obtain the evidence that it does, as I outlined above.

Opening the gate for you does not disprove your offence of ticketless travel. Producing evidence that you were entitled to ticketless travel will do so.

 

[Class377]

IF the staff pass does not actually constitute a valid travel permit, I wouldn't start arguing that you've got away with it for a long time. Whilst it could well be argued that this does represent an agreement, the prosecutions department could equally see it as a long spell of fare avoidance.

For the sake of £20 or £40, I'd pay it up, look to claim it back from my employer if my pass was indeed valid (or appeal AFTER paying it once I had assurances it was valid), or, if it was not valid, chalk it up to experience and start buying tickets.

It does seem strange, however, that ticket holders get free travel, yet stadium staff (who arguably have a greater need to be at the stadium than the fans) wouldn't, given how restrictive parking arrangements are around the Amex.

 

[Clip]

It does seem strange, however, that ticket holders get free travel, yet stadium staff (who arguably have a greater need to be at the stadium than the fans) wouldn't, given how restrictive parking arrangements are around the Amex.

Yes but fans have been paying a levy on their tickets as part fo the deal to build the stadium there so that they could spread out the travel options from train bus and park and ride. Quite simply the staff dont.

 

[sarahj]

I'm quite interested on what a amex staff pass looks like. If it just shows the words in large type. Brighton and Hove Albion, the gateline might have been under the mistaken impression that it was a actual valid for travel football ticket. I've sold tickets to staff heading for work there, but as the trains get busier it gets harder and harder to do. With the gates at Falmer mainly being left open on match days, unless someone is watching out, abuse could take place.

Abuse of the supporters tickets also takes place, with some trying it on all the way from Portsmouth, Hastings etc. As the trains fill up, its get harder to get through and check. But this is not implied that they are valid, just that the person was abusing the system and was not caught. Of course the ticket is valid at Falmer, and with the queuing system in place at Brighton for match days, and no ticket check at the station due to this. Again, this is not implied that you can travel.

But as Clip says, the supporters pay extra to allow free travel on local buses heading to/from falmer and use of train travel within a certain area. This does not and has never been extended to staff.

 

[Haywain]

But as Clip says, the supporters pay extra to allow free travel on local buses heading to/from falmer and use of train travel within a certain area. This does not and has never been extended to staff.

Technically (and drifting off-topic), it is more accurate to say that the free travel is included in the ticket price, as those who do not use public transport, or get free rail travel anyway, do not get to pay less for the match tickets.

 

[Clip]

I'm quite interested on what a amex staff pass looks like. If it just shows the words in large type. Brighton and Hove Albion, the gateline might have been under the mistaken impression that it was a actual valid for travel football ticket.

This is what I was thinking too and which is why it probably gets abused as you go on further in your post to say. Maybe for Brighton they could do something like the Magpie Mover so it differentiates in both style and usage so that everyone who works both the trains and barriers on match day know the differrence.