Penalty Fare Notice - Oystercard issues.

[Mark23]

Hi,

My 16 year old son travelled on Friday from Raynes Park to London Waterloo on 11-15 Zip Photocard (valid till 30/09/2025) that had £2.15 balance. On arrival at Waterloo when attempting to exit something red flashed up on the gate and he asked for assitance to exit. The person he asked scaned his oystercard and said there was no click in data on his oystercard and he was £2.10 in debt. He gave a FPN for ZIP OYSTER NOT VALID.

When I registered a oystercard account to read out the history I see last entry

Date / Time	Journey / Action	Charge	Balance
Friday, 28 March 2025Recent journeys	£4.25 daily total
17:20 - ????	Incomplete journeyRaynes Park [National Rail] to [No touch-out]	£4.25	-£2.10

the FPN is timed at 17.54

Seems like a slam dunk of appeal, need to submit evidence of Zip card in his name, travel history from Zip card, showing touch in as above. Is there anything else I should attempt to get to support this appeal? I don't know how to get more infor from Oystercard apart from submiting a online contact form.

 

[Pushpit]

Looks like they were blocking the gateline for all concession tickets, for manual checking, but the gate agent then misinterpreted the situation. Are there similar trips in that area where the Zip card has clearly been used correctly? So you can demonstrate a pattern of correct usage. And did your son have the means to legally complete their travel yesterday? I think SWR may also want evidence of any cash payments into Zip since SWR can't fully query Oyster transactions.

 

[Mark23]

Looks like they were blocking the gateline for all concession tickets, for manual checking, but the gate agent then misinterpreted the situation. Are there similar trips in that area where the Zip card has clearly been used correctly? So you can demonstrate a pattern of correct usage. And did your son have the means to legally complete their travel yesterday? I think SWR may also want evidence of any cash payments into Zip since SWR can't fully query Oyster transactions.

There will be, but I can't access history before 1st Feb and all other journeys are free bus trips.

It's a £0.95 concessionary fare (off peak 11-15) there was £2.15 on the card

Date / Time	Journey / Action	Charge	Balance
Friday, 28 March 2025Recent journeys	£4.25 daily total
17:20 - ????	Incomplete journeyRaynes Park [National Rail] to [No touch-out]	£4.25	-£2.10
Tuesday, 25 March 2025	£0.00 daily total
16:48	Bus journey, route 131	£0.00	£2.15

 

[swt_passenger]

I’m sure we used to have incidents like this, where TOC gateline staff have appeared completely unaware balances can go negative during a journey. It doesn’t seem to have been a regular thing for a few years though.

Is it in order for the OP to now get on the Oyster helpline and have the missing touch out at Waterloo applied, else the balance will stay negative until topped up? Or can it be done online?

 

[Watershed]

@Mark23 could you clarify what he has been issued with? Was it a Penalty Fare? It would be best if you can provide us with a full copy of any paperwork, albeit with names and references numbers redacted for you/your son's privacy.

This does seem like a case where the RPIs misunderstood the rejection of the Oyster card at the barriers. As you say, the correct fare should have been £0.95 so the low balance on the card was not an issue. Indeed, it was negative during the journey due to the maximum fare that is deducted when you touch in - but this is not also not an issue as this is "corrected" through a corresponding positive amount when you touch out to complete the journey.

Unfortunately both the Penalty Fares appeals body, as well as the train companies themselves, have form for not understanding Oyster issues properly, so be prepared for any first/internal appeal to be incorrectly rejected. It may require several levels of escalation to resolve.

The fact that your son is under the age of 18 means that in practice, there is very little SWR can do if the Penalty Fare remains unpaid (if indeed that is what it is) - you are not liable just because you are his parent - so in some ways you would be appealing more to 'clear' your son's name than for anything else.

Aside from this, you should contact the TfL helpline to resolve the journey since, at the moment, he has been overcharged by virtue of not being allowed to touch out. And you should consider raising a complaint with SWR about this unacceptable treatment of a young person, once the matter has been resolved.

 

[Mark23]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Mar 2025 ==

Unfortunately I never anticipated the appeals process to be as straightforward as it should be in this case. Hence posting on here to get any extra guidance.

I was waiting to resolve this before going through TFL to resolve the overpayment. TFL are very easy to deal with to resolve isues.

I fully intend to complain to SWR about this

 

[Pushpit]

It looks like they have charged the adult Anytime Single, at £7, rather than the £3.50 child rate. I guess there is an argument as to whether someone 16 (with Zip card) gets adult or child fares but either way the PF looks inconsistent.

 

[Watershed]

It looks like they have charged the adult Anytime Single, at £7, rather than the £3.50 child rate. I guess there is an argument as to whether someone 16 (with Zip card) gets adult or child fares but either way the PF looks inconsistent.

The PF states it was issued to a child, which I would assume refers to the railway's definition of "child" (i.e. 11-15) rather than the conventional definition (under 18).

Either way, this is another ground for appeal. @Mark23 you should specify in your appeal that the amount is incorrect (too high) as the fare charged is the adult fare rather than the child fare, which means the Penalty Fare has been issued contrary to Regulation 9(6)(a) of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018:

(6) In this regulation “the full single fare applicable” is to be determined by reference to—
(a) the age of the person in question;

 

[NorthernSystem]

It looks like they have charged the adult Anytime Single, at £7, rather than the £3.50 child rate. I guess there is an argument as to whether someone 16 (with Zip card) gets adult or child fares but either way the PF looks inconsistent.

From my experience with TIPS, notices issued to persons 16-18 are titled "Child [NOTICE NAME]" but is charged at the appropriate O16 price.

 

[Mark23]

It looks like they have charged the adult Anytime Single, at £7, rather than the £3.50 child rate. I guess there is an argument as to whether someone 16 (with Zip card) gets adult or child fares but either way the PF looks inconsistent.

The allegation was that he didn't click in, you only get the TFL child zip fare if you use the zip card for the Journey otherwise as he is 16 he pays an Adult fare.

Would assume it would be the same for me traveling on a oystercard in the same circumstance, where I would be charged the £7 Rail fare vs £4 off peak TFL rate they I was intending traveling on.

 

[Hadders]

We have seen several cases where RPIs/train company staff don't understand the Oyster card system correctly. To be fair, cases I'm aware of involve GTR rather than SWR but a competent person looking at an appeal should be able to see what has happened.

It is clear that your son touched in at the start of his journey so he has done nothing wrong. I would also point out that because he was unable to touch out he's been overcharged so as well as asking for the Penalty Fare to be cancelled you should ask them to refund the overcharge.

 

[Mark23]

Appeal accepted as per below:-

"I understand the authorised collector was unable to identify the valid ticket loaded on to the smartcard
produced for inspection. A penalty fare was subsequently issued with an opportunity to provide proof that
an offence had not been committed.

Although it doesn't happen often, Oyster reading equipment or the product itself can develop a fault,
rendering any ticket held on the smartcard undetectable. Should any problems arise with the card in
the future, please contact Transport for London and arrange for a replacement to be issued.

In the meantime, it is clear from the evidence provided that a valid ticket was held for the journey
reported and on that basis, I'm pleased to advise that the Penalty Fare Notice has been cancelled and
reduced to NIL."

 

[Watershed]

Appeal accepted as per below:-

"I understand the authorised collector was unable to identify the valid ticket loaded on to the smartcard
produced for inspection. A penalty fare was subsequently issued with an opportunity to provide proof that
an offence had not been committed.

Although it doesn't happen often, Oyster reading equipment or the product itself can develop a fault,
rendering any ticket held on the smartcard undetectable. Should any problems arise with the card in
the future, please contact Transport for London and arrange for a replacement to be issued.

In the meantime, it is clear from the evidence provided that a valid ticket was held for the journey
reported and on that basis, I'm pleased to advise that the Penalty Fare Notice has been cancelled and
reduced to NIL."

Glad to hear it!

The appeal explanation doesn't really make sense - though I can't say I'm surprised, as the Penalty Fares appeals bodies don't seem to be particularly competent.

It doesn't sound like this was a fault with the Oyster card, but rather a case of it being rejected by the barriers due to it being a discounted Oyster card, with temporary rejection rules in place due to a revenue blockade/operation at Waterloo. When manually inspected, the RPI then incorrectly thought the Oyster card wasn't validated, or didn't have sufficient balance to cover the cost of the journey.

As a minimum, I would expect an apology from SWR for this incident. Depending on your feelings, you may wish to pursue it further than that.

 

[Hadders]

This is a good result, thanks for updating us. I believe your son has been overcharged by £1.60 because he wasn't able to touch out at Waterloo so you could consider persuing SWR for this, although you might feel it isn't worth the faff given the small sum involved.