Penalty Fare Appeal - Invalid Routing

[sot]

- possesses a ticket,
- is travelling from the origin and to the destination on the ticket,
- or is asking to break their journey
- has appropriate supporting documentation for the journey (eg railcard)
- that the journey is taking place on the correct date
- and the ticket is valid for the time the journey is being made,
- is not taking the Michael
- is an adult or child and the ticket matches the passengers status

Is being best part of 50-100 miles off route but still on a valid itinerary breaking the bold rule?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Feb 2026 ==

@walkingsophie I don't recall if you stated obviously, what was proferred to the revenue inspector to try to convince of validity, or for the sake of not letting on about your routing did you just 'take it'.

 

[bakerstreet]

Is being best part of 50-100 miles off route but still on a valid itinerary breaking the bold rule?

As implied here

(ignoring anyone on this forum testing validities of routes)

I’m talking about the average passenger hence this may be one for a separate thread.

 

[sot]

New CoT with extra clause to specifically ban 'testing' by RailForums members.

That being said there is a clear push to stop people trying to have freedom:

ECML 'trials'
Lack of excess fares
Lack of rights to obtain an excess fare
Poor and questionable restrictions by brand on Brighton main line
Lack of BoJ on Elizabeth core
Change to legal ability to do all criminal, civil and other routes to a single person

 

[walkingsophie]

Is being best part of 50-100 miles off route but still on a valid itinerary breaking the bold rule?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Feb 2026 ==

@walkingsophie I don't recall if you stated obviously, what was proferred to the revenue inspector to try to convince of validity, or for the sake of not letting on about your routing did you just 'take it'.

I tried to explain how it was valid via combining the two tickets according to the routeing guide as I only had the itineraries saved for the option of traveling via Twickenham on the outbound of this ticket, but after they refused and offered me a free excess to Clapham Junction instead and as I was time limited I accepted the penalty fare just to get out of the station.

Perhaps the OP should now open a customer complaint with SWR complaining they had to go through the procedure of appealing a PF that basically should never of been issued in the first place, and seek a reasoning from SWT for this failure and an apology for inconvenience caused.

I am not particularly interested in apologies, but if this becomes a repeating pattern, I will be complaining to see if I can get any money back for the wasted time

 

[bb21]

A

Personally I am not sure if it is the role of "Penalty Services" to apologise for the failing of the TOC by way of clearly wrongly issuing the PF.

Perhaps the OP should now open a customer complaint with SWR complaining they had to go through the procedure of appealing a PF that basically should never of been issued in the first place, and seek a reasoning from SWT for this failure and an apology for inconvenience caused.

Are you actively trying to get this loophole removed? What are you hoping to achieve through such a complaint?

Yes, they will have to investigate, and yes there might be a half-hearted apology and possibly up to £50 (highly likely to be less and possibly none) for a "goodwill payment". The matter is now closed as far as both the operator and the OP are concerned. The appeals body allowed it without any further interrogation of the routing details, which if they did would almost certainly flag this up as a loophole not intended to be valid that way, nor would any sane ordinary passenger between Upper Halliford and Hinchley Wood ever go that way. The operator are probably nonethewiser at the moment (no, they don't all read the forum) and you want to actively bring it to their attention?

There is a reason collective wisdom amongst most fares experts on the forum is to keep a low profile when using good value loophole tickets. The Penalty Fare has been cancelled. The OP has not lost out. Having to argue their case on a loophole ticket is simply occupational hazard which no ordinary passenger would ever come across.

 

[sot]

offered me a free excess to Clapham Junction instead and as I was time limited I accepted the penalty fare just to get out of the station.

An impromptu lavatory visit and/or a requirement to add/remove glucose for diabetes specifically at Waterloo that would not wait until Clapham would have been on the cards.

 

[tatitiliti]

I recently got a penalty fare for invalid routeing when I was doing a journey involving roundabout tickets including using both sections of a return on a single train. I intend to appeal this. I am somewhat busy right now but I will send the relevant details/penalty fare notice later today. If there's any additional information that would be helpful other than the ones listed on the pinned thread, please let me know.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Feb 2026 ==

I was using a Upper Halliford to Hinchley Wood any permitted evening out return ticket to travel to London Waterloo, using the outbound section until Wimbledon and the return section to get to Waterloo from Wimbledon using Easement 700014 and Twickenham being a valid routeing point. I can get the forum website to generate itineraries for this by setting via Waterloo and Putney, but not the National Rail website as they do not allow multiple via points.

I got penalty fares at the gatelines at London Waterloo

My penalty fare is attached

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Feb 2026 ==

The files did not attach properly last post, let's try again. Sorry for the triple post

In addition to the penalty fare appeal which should irrefutably succeed, I hope you are also making a strongly-worded complaint to SWR about the quite frankly disgusting treatment by incompetent and poorly trained SWR RPOs - in demanding a goodwill payment and assurances that the RPO will be adequately trained on the routeing guide in future. It is THEIR BASIC JOB to understand how to use the routeing guide and know the salient parts of the NRCoT and if they can’t even do that, check the route quickly on the spot or, at the very least, issue the benefit of the doubt to passengers in cases they’re unsure and it’s impractical to check, they should get a different job that requires even fewer brain cells.

Fortunately, you’re well-informed enough to know you’re right, yet many other passengers will be wrongly issued PFNs or sent NIPs and comply with payment, so formal complaints and overturned PFNs against every zero brain-celled RPO will be a win for other passengers (or you’d hope at least, anyway…).