Prosecution letter - FCC

[jon0844]

I believe the minimum is twice the fare due, with the remainder due in however many days. That's what I had to pay, and when I won my appeal I was given a refund back to what the ticket should have cost me.

The line in question is clearly marked as a penalty fare area, although I don't know how clear the yellow lines and posters are at every station. Certainly the trains themselves have notices on the doors and some windows.

If the fare was £5.50, then £11 (I believe) would have been due. She had £10. I'm amazed a mate wouldn't lend her the £1, given the fact I'm pretty sure the RPI would have said something about the consequences of not paying.

 

[bb21]

I believe the minimum is twice the fare due,

No. The minimum is the full single fare.

 

[jon0844]

Ah. When I got a PF, I was told that I had to pay double. And I did.

But of course, we know that the RPI concerned was wrong about a lot of things!

 

[bb21]

Aye. I think you've been had.

 

[Uzair]

Why was there no option to pay the PF later? That's what I don't understand.

 

[Mojo]

Why was there no option to pay the PF later? That's what I don't understand.

The Inspector is able to take a decision as to what action they wish to take; and to either issue a Penalty fare, charge for a ticket, give suitable advice, or make a report. If a customer is unwilling/unable to make a full payment on the spot then they are entitled to withdraw their offer of a Penalty fare and choose from one of the other options.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Why was there no option to pay the PF later? That's what I don't understand.

There is a very good reason for NOT reverting to an offer which has been declined, irrepective of how the passenger declined it and irrespective of the sums of money involved.

That reason is to avoid creating a mechanism whereby a fare evader can predictably avoid detection and prosecution by saying whatever is required to get the Inspector to re-offer a more modest cost. For example, if a regular fare evader knew that all they had to do to avoid prosecution was to say AFTER being found without a ticket, that they want to pay, then they would do that on every journey.

As we've already seen in this thread, we have no idea of what was said on the evening of travel, and therefore can't even guess what measures the Inspector took to establish the young passenger's ability to pay and intention to pay, but whatever they were, we now know as a matter of fact that they felt adequately persuaded to make a decision, and that all that we've been told with complete certainty is what that decision was.

 

[Fare-Cop]

No. The minimum is the full single fare.

That presumes that the authorised person has to accept the single fare, which is not the case. Where penalty fares can be applied, the minimum penalty fare IS £20 or twice the single fare, which ever is the greater.

Even in those circumstances where a traveller might believe that they are entitled to receive a penalty fare notice that may not be the case if the authorised person / inspector genuinely believes that there are other factors, which make issue of a penalty fare notice inappropriate. These factors may become apparent during the process of questioning whilst issuing such a notice, at which point it would be correct for the inspector to cancel the issue and make out a report.

The issue of such notices is discretionary and the instructions make clear that if intent to avoid a fare is suspected, a penalty fare notice is not appropriate

As Dave points out, we have no idea what was actually said to the inspector, neither can we be sure what the inspector observed. We only have a third party description of an incident at which they were not present, given by a parent of an alleged offender following a description given to that parent by an aggrieved young person.

I agree with Parham Wood that the notices at stations and on train need to be blunt. I think that is apparent from another thread on here, where a TOC is displaying warning posters and signs warning travellers of the potential consequences of failing to hold a valid ticket. The problem is that customer services departments tend to try to appease with the 'always please the customer' attitude, even when the actual traveller had no intention, or no means of paying in some cases. It seems that where a blunt warning is given, the message is getting home that a valid ticket must be held where it is possible to get one before travelling.

 

[jon0844]

It's fair to say, just going by the posts on here, that a LOT of people have no idea of the severity of not buying a ticket - which can lead you to get a criminal record. Or they assume that's only ever for people who might be caught with a fake ticket or something they consider far more serious than simply not having purchased a ticket.

I am sure people initially hope they can just pay the normal fare, then possibly pay the odd penalty (and I remember when a PF was £10 and people caught just handed over £10, having obviously decided that you only pay when caught). Sadly for these people, TOCs are a little less lenient these days - which can potentially catch out those who might have mitigating circumstances.

 

[Deerfold]

That presumes that the authorised person has to accept the single fare, which is not the case. Where penalty fares can be applied, the minimum penalty fare IS £20 or twice the single fare, which ever is the greater.

I think the recent discussion has been about what the minimum payment *at the time* is - if given a PF I believe that is the value of the single fare.

 

[CockneySparrow]

Why would an 18-year-old going out for the evening only take £10 with her, if the train fare alone was going to be £5.50?

I dont think you can judge on that, there are several scenarios that make that statement null and void

Perhaps she was going to borrow £20 off of one of her mates later once they got in town, maybe she was going to the cash machine in town I know when I go out I only have £20 in my wallet but get money out another two or three times between pubs

Maybe she is a big time player and get drinks off of blokes all night
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I believe the minimum is twice the fare due, with the remainder due in however many days. That's what I had to pay, and when I won my appeal I was given a refund back to what the ticket should have cost me.

The line in question is clearly marked as a penalty fare area, although I don't know how clear the yellow lines and posters are at every station. Certainly the trains themselves have notices on the doors and some windows.

If the fare was £5.50, then £11 (I believe) would have been due. She had £10. I'm amazed a mate wouldn't lend her the £1, given the fact I'm pretty sure the RPI would have said something about the consequences of not paying.

The total fine is twice the single fare to the next stop or £20 whichever is the greatest, but guards base it on where you plan to go rather than the next stop and make you buy another ticket to the destination, if you dont have enough for the fine you the minimum is the book/walk up fare with the balance paid within 21 days enough time for you to appeal

 

[jon0844]

Perhaps she was going to borrow £20 off of one of her mates later once they got in town, maybe she was going to the cash machine in town I know when I go out I only have £20 in my wallet but get money out another two or three times between pubs

Yes, she could have been intending to borrow money. Shame a mate didn't help her at the time!

But if she was going to get cash out later, I highly doubt she had an ATM-only card and therefore she could have paid the penalty fare there and then.

I have to assume she at least said she didn't have any means of payment. I think it's a fair assumption.

And even if she planned to blag free drinks all night, she still should have had some extra money for unforeseen circumstances in my opinion. What if she opted to stay out all night and needed to get a new ticket in the morning, or needed to get a taxi home?

In fact, at the very least, she needed to have a ticket to get home too even if she was going to get the last train back to Biggleswade. And given that last train is quite early compared to other FCC services, she may well have ended up getting another train and having to go for the taxi option from whatever nearby station the train DID stop at.