Penalty fare advice

[Stoat]

Hi - sorry if similar threads on this topic.

I was issued a penalty fare (long story). I appealed 3 times - the first two times were on the grounds of mitigating circumstances which were rejected.

The third appeal was on procedural grounds as I noticed that there is basically no signage staying penalty fares are in operation at Doncaster Station.

At the three main entrances two doors do not have any signage on. One door has an a4 sign - but it is affixed to an automatic door and so is not easy to read and is obscured as the automatic door opens.

There is no signage within the station itself - and certainly none en route to the platform I departed from that day.

I thought this was a slam dunk as it seems they do not comply with the penalty fares regulations on signage - but my appeal was rejected on the grounds that as a regular traveller I knew to buy a ticket before boarding the train.

Does this seem right? Surely the onus is on them to follow the regulations - and either way, how do they know I knew that if it's always been incorrectly signed at my station of origin?

It seems my route of escalation is with passenger focus. Just wondering if anyone has has any success getting things overturned once appeals process has been exhausted or if I've basically lost at this stage.

 

[jumble]

Hi - sorry if similar threads on this topic.

I was issued a penalty fare (long story). I appealed 3 times - the first two times were on the grounds of mitigating circumstances which were rejected.

The third appeal was on procedural grounds as I noticed that there is basically no signage staying penalty fares are in operation at Doncaster Station.

At the three main entrances two doors do not have any signage on. One door has an a4 sign - but it is affixed to an automatic door and so is not easy to read and is obscured as the automatic door opens.

There is no signage within the station itself - and certainly none en route to the platform I departed from that day.

I thought this was a slam dunk as it seems they do not comply with the penalty fares regulations on signage - but my appeal was rejected on the grounds that as a regular traveller I knew to buy a ticket before boarding the train.

Does this seem right? Surely the onus is on them to follow the regulations - and either way, how do they know I knew that if it's always been incorrectly signed at my station of origin?

It seems my route of escalation is with passenger focus. Just wondering if anyone has has any success getting things overturned once appeals process has been exhausted or if I've basically lost at this stage.

How did the PF service get to understand that you were a regular traveller?

 

[Stoat]

How did the PF service get to understand that you were a regular traveller?

In my first two appeals I pointed to my track of record of buying season tickets as evidence of my past record of buying tickets with the (what I now realise) misguided hope they would show some leniency for a genuine mistake.

But genuinely interested whether they gives them a get out if their signage was not in compliance at my station of origin.

 

[AlterEgo]

In my first two appeals I pointed to my track of record of buying season tickets as evidence of my past record of buying tickets with the (what I now realise) misguided hope they would show some leniency for a genuine mistake.

But genuinely interested whether they gives them a get out if their signage was not in compliance at my station of origin.

They don't have a legal "out", so your best bet is to pay the Penalty Fare under duress and take this up with Transport Focus. I expect the assessors are forgetting they are supposed to apply the law rather than a layperson's test of "nobody reads the signs and they wouldn't have made you pay your fare that day anyway so whatever, PF stands, buy your ticket next time, big raspberry to you for using a technicality".

If you need assistance in wording your letter to Transport Focus do post a draft and some of us can help you tighten it up.

 

[John R]

It would also help if you post your third appeal and the response here, if you want help in drafting a letter to Transport Focus.

 

[Watershed]

The fact that you have had your final appeal rejected does not force you to pay. It just means that you have exhausted the statutory appeals process. The train company now has to sue you (i.e. bring a case in the County Court) if they want to force you to pay.

If the Penalty Fare was levied unlawfully (because the Regulations weren't complied with) then I don't see that your appeals being rejected mean you are legally liable to pay. The Penalty Fares Regulations also specifically prevent a train company from prosecuting someone in relation to an incident where a Penalty Fare was appealed, so the civil route is the only one legally open to the train company.

That being said, some train companies try to argue that this law effectively does not apply, relying on a decision by the Chief Magistrate in a recent case. The Chief Magistrate's decision is widely recognised as legally flawed, and the passenger in that case was unrepresented so they did not have a chance to argue their case properly. Moreover, despite his title, the Chief Magistrate is not actually a particularly senior judge and his decisions are not binding on any other Court. However, it is worth informing you of the potential risk you are taking on if you leave the Penalty Fare unpaid - you may have to defend yourself against a prosecution that the train company is barred from bringing.

For now, getting Transport Focus involved is probably your lowest-risk option and one that carries at least a small chance of resolving the situation in your favour.

 

[Swedenorer]

The long story of how the PF was issued might be relevant I suppose but it seems to me that proving the state of the signage on the day the PF was issued rather than noting it recently might also be a problem. In these cases I think it's always best to pay up then argue the toss if for no other reason than you have complied giving you leverage from then on. It's worth noting to that PFs were for the genuine mistake - something prevented usually in the dim and distant past by a bloke on a stool on the way on to the platforms checking tickets. (Abolished by one of BR's more stupid policies. And there were plenty of those at the time.)

 

[Stoat]

Thanks all. Have paid under protest already so now more about the principle.

I uncovered some precedent in a passenger focus report where the fine was overturned because the company could not demonstrate reasonable signage on the day in question so we'll see where this goes.

 

[Watershed]

The Regulations require specific signage to be displayed. Many train companies seem to regard completing with this requirement as optional, hence they leave their Penalty Fares wide open to appeal.

 

[Swedenorer]

The Law on signage is as follows

Display of Notices​

8.—(1) The requirements for the display of notices are as follows.

(2) Where any entrance onto a platform at the station is not the entrance to, or situated within, a compulsory ticket area, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a standard notice”) must be displayed at that entrance.

(3) If the station has one or more compulsory ticket areas, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a compulsory ticket area notice”) must be displayed at each entrance into a compulsory ticket area.

(4) Standard notices and compulsory ticket area notices must also be displayed at sufficient locations around the station so that at least one notice is readily visible to passengers prior to boarding a train at the station, including passengers changing from one train to another train.

There is no specification on size in the schedule - section 4 gives them a bit of a get out. But to to be fair to some TOCs you cannot miss the A0 notices. The ones at Doncaster despite being I agree small being on the entrance doors they will argue comply. It all depends on what you mean by the entrance to a platform I suppose.

 

[Stoat]

The Law on signage is as follows

Display of Notices​

8.—(1) The requirements for the display of notices are as follows.

(2) Where any entrance onto a platform at the station is not the entrance to, or situated within, a compulsory ticket area, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a standard notice”) must be displayed at that entrance.

(3) If the station has one or more compulsory ticket areas, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a compulsory ticket area notice”) must be displayed at each entrance into a compulsory ticket area.

(4) Standard notices and compulsory ticket area notices must also be displayed at sufficient locations around the station so that at least one notice is readily visible to passengers prior to boarding a train at the station, including passengers changing from one train to another train.

There is no specification on size in the schedule - section 4 gives them a bit of a get out. But to to be fair to some TOCs you cannot miss the A0 notices. The ones at Doncaster despite being I agree small being on the entrance doors they will argue comply. It all depends on what you mean by the entrance to a platform I suppose.

Thanks - yes I'd seen the legislation.

My point is that there are multiple routes to access the platforms without passing a penalty fares notice. Only one door has a notice and the others do not. Given they do not know what route people take to get to their train they cannot guarantee that 'at least one' notice is visible. Where a notice does exist I'd also contend that 'readily visible' is not covered by an A4 poster which moves upon approach, is obscured behind the inner mechanism of the automatic door as the door opens, and can easily be obscured by people congregating at the station doors.

The inconsistency in signage across stations is astounding.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 May 2026 ==

Quick update. I've now had a case worker assigned at passenger focus and my MP is also raising the issue with Northern directly. Passenger focus have been clear they can't mandate Northern to change their mind on this but will advocate on my behalf.

Are there any options available to me if they play hard ball on this? I'm convinced they've not complied with the regulations and I don't think they even properly considered the third appeal (the response I got was sloppy, did not address the points I'd raised and even had a spelling mistake!)

I'd half considered whether I could take them to the small claims court but have no idea about practicalities. Surely there has to be a way holding a public body to account for non compliance with regulations (especially as Northern rail is in public ownership). Does anyone know if there's any precedent here or whether they could immediately get it struck out by saying it has been subject to an appeals process?

 

[jumble]

In my first two appeals I pointed to my track of record of buying season tickets as evidence of my past record of buying tickets with the (what I now realise) misguided hope they would show some leniency for a genuine mistake.

But genuinely interested whether they gives them a get out if their signage was not in compliance at my station of origin.

How one can come to the conclusion that someone who buys season tickets is in any way aware of the need to buy a ticket before boarding is very odd.

 

[Watershed]

Are there any options available to me if they play hard ball on this? I'm convinced they've not complied with the regulations and I don't think they even properly considered the third appeal (the response I got was sloppy, did not address the points I'd raised and even had a spelling mistake!)

I'd half considered whether I could take them to the small claims court but have no idea about practicalities. Surely there has to be a way holding a public body to account for non compliance with regulations (especially as Northern rail is in public ownership). Does anyone know if there's any precedent here or whether they could immediately get it struck out by saying it has been subject to an appeals process?

Seeing as you have now paid, bringing a claim in the County Court (which would almost certainly be allocated to the Small Claims Track given the comparatively low value) would probably be your next step if neither Transport Focus nor your MP can change their position.

In my experience of bringing a number of County Court claims against different companies over the years, many companies will not defend such claims because it will cost them more than the value of the claim - and in the Small Claims Track there is generally no ability to recover legal costs, even for the winning party.

If Northern nevertheless chose to defend the claim, I wouldn't be surprised if they made the kind of argument you have alluded to at the end. I'm not aware of any reported cases of people taking train companies to Court to claim back unlawfully imposed Penalty Fares, so nobody can say definitively what the outcome would be.

The Regulations do not state that the statutory appeals process is definitive, i.e. that you are liable for the debt without question, as is the case for penalties for not paying ULEZ or bridge/tunnel tolls for example. As such I think that you do have a reasonable case if it were to come to it.

 

[ikcdab]

How one can come to the conclusion that someone who buys season tickets is in any way aware of the need to buy a ticket before boarding is very odd.

I do agree with this. Obviously everybody knows you need to buy a ticket to travel on a train, especially a frequent traveller like the OP. In this case, the OP is attempting to get his penalty annulled on a technicality.

 

[furlong]

In this case, the OP is attempting to get his penalty annulled on a technicality.

It is hardly a technicality if there was never any lawful authority to impose such a penalty in the first place!

I've been to Doncaster station and it is very clear that it cannot be an origin station for the purposes of the Penalty Fares regulations and there is no excuse for whoever purportedly imposed such a Penalty Fare not to have been well aware of that! If any other similar Penalty Fares have been imposed on other people, then the OP might like to campaign for their refund too, particularly if an MP is getting involved.

 

[AlterEgo]

This is not technically the case. The PFN cannot be prosecuted, however, there is nothing from stopping the TOC withdrawing the PFN and then subsequently starting a prosecution for the Byelaw offence.

If the PFN has been appealed then this provides a statutory bar against prosecution, notwithstanding the completely flawed and non-binding judgment of the Chief Magistrate @Watershed mentions.


From the Regulations (my emphasis):

(3) Where a person falling within paragraph (1)(a) has appealed against the penalty fare under regulation 16, proceedings for any of the offences specified in paragraph (4) may only be brought against that person for the same failure to produce a platform ticket or a valid travel ticket if the operator, on whose behalf the penalty fare was charged, notifies the relevant Appeal Panel that the penalty fare is cancelled before—

(a)the relevant Appeal Panel has decided the outcome of the appeal under regulation 16; or

(b)the time period mentioned in paragraph 6 of Schedule 2 expires,

whichever is sooner.
(4) The offences referred to in paragraphs (1) and (3) are the offences under—

(a)section 5(3)(a) or (b) of the Regulation of the Railways Act 1889(1);

(b)any byelaw made under—

(i)section 67 of the Transport Act 1962(2);

(ii)section 129 of the Railways Act 1993(3);

(iii)section 219 of the Transport Act 2000(4);

(iv)section 46 of the Railways Act 2005(5).

[F3(c)in respect of England, section 11 of the Fraud Act 2006.]

For the avoidance of doubt, the OP has appealed and the outcome has been decided.

 

[Stoat]

Update for you all. Northern rail have liaised with lner and have between them decided the current signage is insufficient. They have told me via x they are changing the signage. I take this as acknowledgement that the penalty fare was imposed illegally and will be expecting them to refund and to expunge my records from all penalty fare databases. I will let you know how this turns out.

To respond to other commenters - I personally think there's a better model than the strict liability they impose at the moment. I had some clear mitigating circumstances which have been disregarded at every step of the way. Nonetheless, if they are going to work on strict liability basis it works both ways. We have laws and regulations for a reason and companies / public bodies don't get to choose which bits they follow and which they don't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 May 2026 ==

It is hardly a technicality if there was never any lawful authority to impose such a penalty in the first place!

I've been to Doncaster station and it is very clear that it cannot be an origin station for the purposes of the Penalty Fares regulations and there is no excuse for whoever purportedly imposed such a Penalty Fare not to have been well aware of that! If any other similar Penalty Fares have been imposed on other people, then the OP might like to campaign for their refund too, particularly if an MP is getting involved.

I will be campaigning for their refund believe you me

 

[Swedenorer]

Travelling without a ticket has been a strict liability offence for years. The PF scheme was designed to provide an alternative for mistakes etc.

 

[AlterEgo]

The PF scheme was designed to provide an alternative for mistakes etc.

It wasn't.

 

[Stoat]

Quick update. After raising with the ombudsman Northern Rail immediately backed down, refunded and reversed the penalty fare.

Via FOI I now have copies of internal correspondence between Northern and LNER acknowledging signage is non compliant and acknowledging that they don't know for how long the station has been non compliant. Not sure what I'll do with this information yet but very useful to have.

Lessons learned
1. Supposed 'independent' appeals panel for penalty fares doesn't appear to be worth a jot - if they can't properly consider the information presented and make a fair assessment what is their purpose?
2. If you have a clear case of unfair treatment post independent appeal it definitely is possible to get the position reversed - but does increase the effort! Imagine most people just give up at that point.