Pre-Court Settlement Offer - help needed!

[los247]

So a few weeks ago I boarded a train from Malvern Link to Worcester Foregate Street without buying a ticket first. There were queues at the ticket machine and ticket office and I didn't leave enough time (yes I fully accept this is 100% my fault). Stupidly, I just got on and tried to buy the ticket on the train. The conductor was having none of it, took my name and address and warned me I'd be receiving a letter in the post.
Sure enough, a few days ago I received this letter. It is entitled Pre Court Settlement Offer. Basically the letter says I need to pay £85.20 by 18th August or face going to court and being slapped with a criminal record! I fully expected to have to pay some sort of fine, I just can't understand why it is this much...the original ticket was £5.20. Shouldn't it have been a penalty fare of £20 as stated here:

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46592.aspx

I'm 19 and a student - £85.20 is a lot of money. Can anyone offer any advice as to why it doesn't just constitute a £20 penalty fare? Also, if I appealed it, would they just increase it even more?? It does say if I don't pay by 18th August, it'll go up to £160, which will be followed by a court summons... Finally, would they really take you to court? I would be interested in other people's experiences of this.

 

[najaB]

Can anyone offer any advice as to why it doesn't just constitute a £20 penalty fare? Also, if I appealed it, would they just increase it even more?? It does say if I don't pay by 18th August, it'll go up to £160, which will be followed by a court summons... Finally, would they really take you to court? I would be interested in other people's experiences of this.

In order: because a penalty fare has to be issued on the spot and can't be issued retroactively. And in any case is not a right.

They are making you an offer which you are within your rights to decline, in the same manner they can increase it if there feel like.

And yes, people get taken to court over ticketing irregularities the time.

 

[mikeg]

Seems pretty standard to me, a penalty fare is issued there and then at the revenue inspector's discretion. You don't have any right to be issued with one and they can choose to proceed straight to prosecution if they so wish. Luckily you have been offered an out of court settlement, which I suggest you pay asap.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I agree with najaB and mikeg. This is an offer to 'dispose' of the matter - a matter which appears to include adequate evidence to support a prosecution in court for a criminal offence, and secure a conviction. You are free to challenge the prosecution and undermine their evidence if it is wrong.

Otherwise, I agree that it would be wise to accept the offer as soon as possible and make the payment proposed.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Either give up the alcohol for a few weeks or borrow the money from your parents - or wherever. Excessive maybe on the face of it but incredibly cheap if it avoids a lifelong criminal record and job prospects etc.

Take the advice offered and do not ignore the offer.

 

[Agent_c]

Penalty fares are for accidents, boarding a train without a ticket isn't an accident.

Just pay it.

 

[gray1404]

I am surprised here. I am not sure what TOC you travelled with but for a guard on London Midland not to sell a ticket is very fare. Perhaps it was GWR you boarded, but again their guards are revenue trained.

My advise is you need to pay this off before the deadline otherwise you will end up in court over it and it will cost you a lot more.

 

[OnlyM]

Pay the fine and be done with it. You won't haggle them down it is what it is. Failure to pay the fine will have you in court with an even higher charge than what it was before.

 

[AlterEgo]

Pay the fine and be done with it. You won't haggle them down it is what it is. Failure to pay the fine will have you in court with an even higher charge than what it was before.

The OP hasn't been fined.

This is a pre-court settlement offer.

 

[los247]

OK, thanks everyone for your advice. I guess I'll put it down to experience...

 

[gray1404]

OK, thanks everyone for your advice. I guess I'll put it down to experience...

Thats the sensible thing to do. Can I ask which train company you travelled with? Just so we have an idea of which one is giving out £80 settlements and was it a guard you spoke to (not an Inspector)?

 

[mikeg]

I suspect from my experience London midland. I was travelling on a lm train from Watford junction to bletchley about a year ago. Penalty fares were being given out and one had it to explain to him that it's £20 now or either £80 or court later, though GWR may too have a similar policy.

Interestingly, the authorised collector was at the end of the carriage, with people being invited to get their tickets from him and a warning about the penalty fare scheme. It was also said that a ticket check would be carried out before Milton Keynes and that anyone still without a ticket would be 'dealt with appropriately'. Never seen anything quite like it before or since but seemed largely effective. What surprised me was the sheer number being penalty fares, must've been a fifth or even a quarter of my carriage at least. Made for entertaining viewing I can tell you. I was sat there smugly with my anytime day return. As I alighted at bletchley I never got to find out what happened to the two ladies opposite me who agreed that they would pretend to be asleep as they 'cant lay a finger on you'!


Have no idea if they're allowed to operate the scheme like this but it worked

 

[gray1404]

They are either selling tickets or they are not. I have never known a LM guard refuse to sell a ticket. To be coming out with comments like £20 now or £80 later goes against the PF rules. At the time a customer need only pay the Anytime Single fare.

 

[Comstock]

While I agree the OP would be most wise not to risk it, just out of interest what are the chances the TOC would actually go all the way with this? 100% 50-50? or less than that.

 

[mikeg]

If the settlement remains unpaid they'd almost certainly go all the way but probably for a byelaw prosecution given the circumstances of the op trying to pay.

To gray1404. What would be the consequences of such a breach of the rules? I have to admit it didn't seem quite proper. Given that it was £20 that appeared to be the amount demanded would it be overturned on appeal? They were told of appeal procedures so suspecting not a guard but then I didn't see a separate guard and lm afaik don't do DOO. Am I also correct in thinking a guard cannot issue penalty fares? Or am I just dreaming that up? Certainly when I lived in Newcastle under Lyme and had more cause to use lm services I'd agree with your statement that I've never seen a guard refuse sale of a ticket, even where the passenger should have already had one...

 

[los247]

Thats the sensible thing to do. Can I ask which train company you travelled with? Just so we have an idea of which one is giving out £80 settlements and was it a guard you spoke to (not an Inspector)?

Yes - First Great Western, and I think it was an inspector...? Sorry if that sounds really ignorant but I don't know the difference between a guard and an inspector. Anyway, the guy who comes round and checks everyone's tickets etc. I had purchased a ticket on this train journey a few weeks ago when I was running late, so I genuinely just assumed I could on this occasion too. I didn't realise it was at the inspector's discretion. There are barriers at Worcester, so there's no way I could get past without a ticket anyway...

 

[trentside]

Yes - First Great Western, and I think it was an inspector...? Sorry if that sounds really ignorant but I don't know the difference between a guard and an inspector. Anyway, the guy who comes round and checks everyone's tickets etc. I had purchased a ticket on this train journey a few weeks ago when I was running late, so I genuinely just assumed I could on this occasion too. I didn't realise it was at the inspector's discretion. There are barriers at Worcester, so there's no way I could get past without a ticket anyway...

On most occasions it will be the train guard checking tickets. They tend to use discretion more often and don't have the power to issue penalty fares etc. It's more likely you encountered a Revenue Protection Inspector (RPI) who are there to enforce the rules and deal with instances of fare evasion. RPIs can issue penalty fares (where appropriate) or report people for prosecution. They travel around the network and do random checks at stations and on trains.

 

[Comstock]

If the settlement remains unpaid they'd almost certainly go all the way but probably for a byelaw prosecution given the circumstances of the op trying to pay.

Fair enough.

I was just thinking that while it would be stupid of the OP not to pay, the dynamics might look very different for someone who already has a more serious conviction, or who is retired, or is close to retirement and whos job wouldn't be impacted by a conviction.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . the dynamics might look very different for someone who already has a more serious conviction, or who is retired, or is close to retirement and whos job wouldn't be impacted by a conviction.

I'm not sure what you are referring to by "the dynamics", but the circumstances you describe are only admissable during sentencing following a finding of guilt, or following an admission of guilt. They are not available as evidence to inform the decision of whether or not the offence was committed. (Crim. P.R. 37).

I'm struggling to see how these "dynamics" assist Los247, a 19 y.o. student. Not retired or close to retirement. If guilty, a statement of means should be offered, but not until sentencing.

 

[SickyNicky]

There are barriers at Worcester, so there's no way I could get past without a ticket anyway...

Are there? They must have gone up in the last week or so then.

 

[gray1404]

To gray1404. What would be the consequences of such a breach of the rules? I have to admit it didn't seem quite proper. Given that it was £20 that appeared to be the amount demanded would it be overturned on appeal? They were told of appeal procedures so suspecting not a guard but then I didn't see a separate guard and lm afaik don't do DOO. Am I also correct in thinking a guard cannot issue penalty fares? Or am I just dreaming that up? Certainly when I lived in Newcastle under Lyme and had more cause to use lm services I'd agree with your statement that I've never seen a guard refuse sale of a ticket, even where the passenger should have already had one...

I have only just seen this sorry.

I am a little confused by your post. Your not the OP are you and you were not there at the time.

 

[mikeg]

Apologies I went off at a tangent on a previous post and was referring to a separate incident. Note to self:keep things helpful to the op and on-topic.

 

[Comstock]

I'm struggling to see how these "dynamics" assist Los247, a 19 y.o. student. Not retired or close to retirement.

Yes I know.
I was just saying, some one in one of those groups might well be tempted to simply ignore it and see if they do go all the way.

After all taking someone to court is expensive, and although success is very likely it is never guaranteed.

 

[gray1404]

Apologies I went off at a tangent on a previous post and was referring to a separate incident. Note to self:keep things helpful to the op and on-topic.

That's fine. Feel free to start a separate post with your stuff. I think if the OP did encounter an RPI then they should have issued a PF if they felt a genuine mistake had been made. A lot of the time on Merseyrail I see them issuing a PF even if it is clearly not a genuine mistake. I think some TOCs take the view that:

1. even on a PF route if the guard comes into contact with the ticket less passenger it is better to get the revenue from them anyway. The down side to this is that it then creates a false understanding on the part of passengers that it is ok to get on the train without a ticket and pay when challenged.

2. Even if it is not a genuine mistake and the RPI comes into contact with the passenger then it is easier and quicker to extract a PF from the customer (be that paying it on the spot or giving a slip for it to be paid later) knowing that if they don't pay it then they can cancel it and issue legal proceedings. The disadvantage to this is that (moreover on routes where the guards are not revenue trained) fare dodgers realise it is cheaper to pay up the £20 PF a couple of times a year then to buy tickets each time and it means that the TOC is not using the PFs for genuine mistakes.

HOWEVER, in THIS case it appears that the RPI did not believe that the OP had made a genuine mistake. Although the RPI could have issued a £20 PF - which could have resolved the matter - the RPI took the view that walking past an open ticket office/TVM was intent to avoid payment and there it is was not a genuine mistake. The RPI was therefore within their rights not to sell a ticket (again something they are allowed to do - sell a ticket - if they see fit*) or issue a PF. As it is the TOC has decided to offer an out of court settlement which they were under no duty to do. As it is this is a good (cheaper) outcome for the OP then going to court.

I hope I've answered your question to me now.

(*side note, I did once see a group of RPIs getting on board a Merseyrail train as it was pulling in. I didn't have time to get a ticket but as it was pulling in I asked if they would be so kind as to sell me a ticket - I was expecting them to say no. They said that's fine as I'd had the decency to ask and I got on the train with them and one of them had a pad of tickets to be written out by hand. Meanwhile, another issued a PF to another person already on the train)

 

[swt_passenger]

1. even on a PF route if the guard comes into contact with the ticket less passenger it is better to get the revenue from them anyway. The down side to this is that it then creates a false understanding on the part of passengers that it is ok to get on the train without a ticket and pay when challenged.

I thought under the rules a guard who cannot issue penalty fares must issue a penalty fare warning leaflet, or something produced by the ticket machine, or the tickets must have preprinted warning on the back? If the rules are followed a 'false understanding' should not occur, the passenger should end the transaction believing he's had a lucky break that time...

 

[island]

I thought under the rules a guard who cannot issue penalty fares must issue a penalty fare warning leaflet, or something produced by the ticket machine, or the tickets must have preprinted warning on the back? If the rules are followed a 'false understanding' should not occur, the passenger should end the transaction believing he's had a lucky break that time...

Most stock used for on-train sales has preprinted PF warnings on the back these days.

 

[WillR]

Seems pretty standard to me, a penalty fare is issued there and then at the revenue inspector's discretion. You don't have any right to be issued with one and they can choose to proceed straight to prosecution if they so wish. Luckily you have been offered an out of court settlement, which I suggest you pay asap.

It isn't at the "inspector's discretion", since the website specifies 'The course of action taken depends on the circumstances'. The question is which circumstances determine action? Something obvious, like trying to hide from the conductor or inspector, would result in a larger fine or court hearing, which would be understandable.