cheesebeano
New Member
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2015
- Messages
- 1
In a nutshell, can someone explain why ScotRail (and others) do not apply a penalty fare scheme? What is different about the law and what would it take to change it?
-
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!
Penalty Fares in Scotland
- Thread starter cheesebeano
- 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
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,470
I assume that you are looking for an answer more advanced than "because the DfT/Transport Scotland didn't consider it necessary"?
An answer someone else on the forum gave me is that it has to do with some legal differences between Scotland and England. I've expanded on the basic answers I was given to explain em more, but I'm not sure if the basic "answer" is right or not.
Firstly, in Scotland only the Crown Office/Procurator Fiscal can begin criminal proceedings.
In England, "Private" prosecutions are permitted, meaning they can be brought by other people. The CAA, RSPCA, the Railway Companies, as well as the DPP can prosecute in England.
The result is if you're in court on criminal charges in Scotland it always is the Fiscals you'll be facing - meaning that Scotrail would be dependent on the Fiscal's deciding that the case was in the public interest and deciding it was worth their time to persue. Bit hard to back up your threats of prosecution when you can't do it yourself.
In Scotland, for a criminal case to succeed each "Essential fact" is required to be proven with at least two pieces of evidence. This is called "Corroboration".
The SNP proposed getting rid of this rule, but all but about 2 judges in all of Scotland were opposed to such a change, fearing that it would result in more "Risky/umerited" prosecutions being brought (The SNP liked the idea it as it makes it easier to prosecute Sexual assaults).
Firstly, in Scotland only the Crown Office/Procurator Fiscal can begin criminal proceedings.
In England, "Private" prosecutions are permitted, meaning they can be brought by other people. The CAA, RSPCA, the Railway Companies, as well as the DPP can prosecute in England.
The result is if you're in court on criminal charges in Scotland it always is the Fiscals you'll be facing - meaning that Scotrail would be dependent on the Fiscal's deciding that the case was in the public interest and deciding it was worth their time to persue. Bit hard to back up your threats of prosecution when you can't do it yourself.
In Scotland, for a criminal case to succeed each "Essential fact" is required to be proven with at least two pieces of evidence. This is called "Corroboration".
The SNP proposed getting rid of this rule, but all but about 2 judges in all of Scotland were opposed to such a change, fearing that it would result in more "Risky/umerited" prosecutions being brought (The SNP liked the idea it as it makes it easier to prosecute Sexual assaults).
The Scottish Government proposed changing this rule - while it may not seem to be a big difference (as the SNP has a majority) - it's worth noting that there were SNP members opposed to the change, and members of other parties in favour of it.
You are correct, Scottish Government would be more a more correct phrasing.
- Status