Southeastern Bylaws report

[Watershed]

Good morning, I just received this now.please any help on how to respond xView attachment 104240

Right, so they've sent a letter asking for your account of events, as expected.

You might want to write a draft and put it on here so that people can give you feedback. You probably want to include some of the following:

• You tried to pay using a £20 note, which was the only payment method you had
• That note wasn't accepted by the machine
• The ticket office was shut
• You therefore boarded without a ticket and wanted to pay at the next opportunity
• A member of staff asked you for your ticket
• You explained you needed to buy one, as you had been unable to buy one at the station, but they refused to sell you one
• They demanded your details, which you did not want to provide as you did not consider that the member of staff was entitled to them
• You later provided them under duress

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Right, so they've sent a letter asking for your account of events, as expected.

You might want to write a draft and put it on here so that people can give you feedback. You probably want to include some of the following:

• You tried to pay using a £20 note, which was the only payment method you had
• That note wasn't accepted by the machine
• The ticket office was shut
• You therefore boarded without a ticket and wanted to pay at the next opportunity
• A member of staff asked you for your ticket
• You explained you needed to buy one, as you had been unable to buy one at the station, but they refused to sell you one
• They demanded your details, which you did not want to provide as you did not consider that the member of staff was entitled to them
• You later provided them under duress

You also need to come to your own view as to whether you did have a chance to buy a ticket. Obviously, you had your £20 note, which the ticket machine wouldn't accept. I think it's clear that the ticket office was closed at the time you were travelling. But did you not have a credit or debit card on you? If you did, then the railway will argue that you could have used that to buy a ticket.

If you are certain that there is no way that you could have bought a ticket at the station* before getting on the train, then your reply should make this clear. But if you decide that you could have bought a ticket before getting on the train (and note that not having very long at the station to buy a ticket does not work as an excuse) then your reply to the letter should be much more about accepting that you made a mistake, and confirming to the railway that you won't make it again: @Hadders' advice at post #19 above would then be a good template to follow.

If you didn't have a chance to buy a ticket and you tell the railway this, I think that there is a good chance that they will drop the matter. If you did have a chance to buy a ticket which you now realise that you could have taken, and you tell the railway that, then I think there is a good chance they will allow an out of court settlement, which will cost you some money but will not end up in court.

* Please note that I've said 'at the station': as far as I know, there isn't yet an expectation that passengers should use the various railway apps and websites to buy a ticket in advance, so even if it turns out that you have the Southeastern Railway app on your phone that doesn't mean that you should have used it to buy a ticket.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Fawkes Cat beat me to it, did you have, or attempt to use a debit or credit card in the machine as an alternative means of payment?

 

[WesternLancer]

Good morning, I just received this now.please any help on how to respond xView attachment 104240

Thanks for posting this

Start working up a draft reply ASAP - see post #19 and my post #27 above for what to write. (and the other recent excellent posts just above this)

Keep it short.

If it's absolutely the true case that you tried to pay with a bank note that the ticket machine(s) would not accept, and that you were happy and willing to pay on the train when you were spoken to by staff, then you need to make that the main point of your letter/reply as per my post above. If they do not accept that you will almost still have further chance to write again.

Get working on that draft - post it here for comment / feedback if you feel that would help - do this ASAP.

If you are replying by post be prepared to send it Royal Mail 'signed for' and guaranteed delivery so you do not miss this 7 day deadline (even if you are able to e-mail it as well). It is vital that you reply and vital that you do not miss the deadline. It sounds worse than it is but you are strictly speaking on a route to prosecution for a criminal offence so your focus needs to be on avoiding that, which is possible.

Good luck

Edit to other recent posts - IIRC OP said they only could pay with cash in an earlier post (#17) so I am taking this at face value.
@Kate Anthony : you are not obliged to carry payment cards with you to pay for stuff so even if you have one they can not use the argument that you should have used it - eg you may have left it at home by mistake for example. Simply state in your reply "I attempted to pay by cash, as that was the only payment method I had with me, but the ticket machine I tried to use at Strood station before boarding the train would not accept the £20 note I put in the machine" if you tried several times and / or tried in more than one machine, state that too.

PS - you do not need to give your occupation or NI number or date of birth (unless you are entitled to child fares perhaps) in your reply to them if you do not wish to do so. They will be seeking this (eg date of birth) at least in part so they prosecute the correct person if it comes to that and job/NI details so that the court can obtain any fine from you that the court imposes more easily etc. I do not believe you are obliged to state it in your reply (though they may consider that you are being more helpful in your response if you do complete it, which may be worth thinking about)

 

[Starmill]

Seems cheeky in the extreme to request your occupation, National Insurance number and date of birth. Your name and address, with email address or telephone number should be sufficient.

 

[WesternLancer]

Fawkes Cat beat me to it, did you have, or attempt to use a debit or credit card in the machine as an alternative means of payment?

see post #17 from OP where they answer this question.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

But did you not have a credit or debit card on you? If you did, then the railway will argue that you could have used that to buy a ticket.

see post #17 from OP where they answer this question.

No I was not having any alternative means to pay except that 20£

Apologies to the OP as this is beginning to go off at a tangent, but just to explain why I raised this point:

The railway will see the question of whether someone had the ability to pay as important, so I think that they are very likely indeed to ask the question. In fact I am certain that they will ask this question.

As @WesternLancer points out, the OP comments on this in post #17 (which I've quoted above) but the wording isn't precise: it is clear that the OP didn't think that they had any alternative means to pay, but does not confirm that they have considered specifically whether they had a credit or debit card on them. So although I know that this is pushing at a point which might be considered settled, I think it's really important for the OP to get their answer right. If it really is the case that the £20 note was their only method of payment (EDIT) and the ticket machine wouldn't take the £20 note (END EDIT), my expectation is that Southeastern will drop the whole matter. But if the OP misleads Southeastern on this matter (however much that might be by mistake) then the railway will get the impression that the OP is not being fully open with them. That will not encourage Southeastern to offer a settlement - and I'm guessing that the OP would prefer to sort this all out without having to go to court, so it's best to do everything possible to keep the railway understanding that the OP is trying to work with them.

 

[30907]

• They demanded your details, which you did not want to provide as you did not consider that the member of staff was entitled to them

whatever you thought, they were entitled to know your name and address, and it would help to apologise for not providing these immediately. It is the one point where on your account they have a case.

• You later provided them under duress

Even if you have evidence of this, I would leave it out. It doesn't particularly help.
Otherwise, I am with Watershed.

 

[duncombec]

The main building at Strood is closed in the evening, so the only accessible ticket machine is outside the station - at the opposite end of the station building to the out of hours entrance! That in itsself should speak for intent to pay!

Two points:
- SouthEastern have had a large-scale anti-fare evasion campaign in the Medway Towns for at least a month - quite successfully, from what I've seen. There probably isn't much wiggle room at the moment - and on that line at that time, I think all the stations will be unstaffed and open, so ripe for roving inspectors.
- I never pay cash for rail fares so don't know, but could it have refused the note because the machine couldn't issue change?

 

[Watershed]

whatever you thought, they were entitled to know your name and address

The member of staff was only entitled to OP's name and address if they had reasonable grounds for suspicion of an offence.

If, as OP's account suggests, they didn't even entertain OP's explanation, I think that is unlikely to give reasonable grounds for suspicion. In which case they weren't entitled to OP's name and address.

it would help to apologise for not providing these immediately

Apologising for it implies acceptance of guilt and effectively rules out a plea of 'not guilty', should the matter proceed to Court.

It is the one point where on your account they have a case.

From what OP has said, it's the only possible offence that could have been committed.

Even if you have evidence of this, I would leave it out. It doesn't particularly help.
Otherwise, I am with Watershed.

I wouldn't necessarily word the response that way; the word 'duress' might be misinterpreted.

But if OP writes that they initially refused to give their details because they didn't think there were grounds for requesting them - yet later gave them anyway - that might undermine the initial claim.

 

[221129]

If, as OP's account suggests, they didn't even entertain OP's explanation, I think that is unlikely to give reasonable grounds for suspicion. In which case they weren't entitled to OP's name and address.

That is your opinion, however I doubt a magistrate would agree with you.

 

[Haywain]

If, as OP's account suggests, they didn't even entertain OP's explanation, I think that is unlikely to give reasonable grounds for suspicion. In which case they weren't entitled to OP's name and address.

Not having a ticket would seem sufficient to give reasonable grounds for suspicion.

 

[Jackofspades]

I’m wondering if there’s more to this story, as I’m wondering why it was a bylaw offence rather than being issued with a penalty fare if it was as simple as not having a ticket

 

[Watershed]

That is your opinion, however I doubt a magistrate would agree with you.

Fair enough, and that's your view, we can agree to disagree.

But I think it would be perverse (and therefore unlikely) for a Magistrate to convict them of not giving their name and address - given that the OP is, from their account, not guilty of the fares-related offence which would give grounds for reasonable suspicion.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2021 ==

Not having a ticket would seem sufficient to give reasonable grounds for suspicion.

Given that there are several valid reasons for not having a ticket, I don't think that alone is grounds for suspicion. Certainly not if the passenger gives an explanation which prima facie falls into one of one of those reasons.

Otherwise anyone who boards a paytrain service, or who has boarded at a station without any ticket facilities at all, would have to give their name and address on demand. Which is clearly nonsensical.

I’m wondering if there’s more to this story, as I’m wondering why it was a bylaw offence rather than being issued with a penalty fare if it was as simple as not having a ticket

I suspect it may have been the OP's non-disclosure of their name and address which caused the member of staff to take things in this direction.

It's also possible they encountered a member of staff who was not qualified/authorised to issue Penalty Fares.

 

[221129]

C

Otherwise anyone who boards a paytrain service, or who has boarded at a station without any ticket facilities at all, would have to give their name and address on demand.

Correct. They would.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The member of staff was only entitled to OP's name and address if they had reasonable grounds for suspicion of an offence.

If, as OP's account suggests, they didn't even entertain OP's explanation, I think that is unlikely to give reasonable grounds for suspicion. In which case they weren't entitled to OP's name and address.

The precise wording of the relevant bit of byelaw 1823

reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these byelaws

It's worth looking at what this isn't. It's not that whoever is being asked for their details should be guilty of breaching the byelaws - and it's not that the railway inspector should have just a vague suspicion- it's a reasonable suspicion.

Let's look at the facts of this case as they would have been known to the inspector:
- the OP had not bought a ticket at a station with a ticket machine
- the OP had cash on them
- the OP asserts that the machine did not accept their cash.

Guilt is something for a court to determine on the basis of all relevant facts, and there are clearly facts that the inspector will not have had - such as whether the machine(s) at Strood was accepting the OP's £20 note. So the inspector is not in a position to determine guilt. But what view might they have taken of the assertion that the machine at Strood would not take the £20 note? Unless specific advice had been given by Southeastern to their travelling inspectors that there was a problem with that machine (or maybe all machines), then it seems to me it's reasonable to assume that the machine would be working and accepting cash - which would mean that the inspector would reasonably not accept the OP's assertion - and so could reasonably suspect that the OP was in breach of byelaw 18.

Having said all of which, I continue to think that the railway will see the alleged failure to pay a fare as the main issue: if they are convinced that the OP couldn't buy a ticket before boarding, then the point about not giving name and address will be dropped as well.

 

[WesternLancer]

Some good additional advice in recent posts. OP needs to get the draft done so people can suggest amends on those points really (before we get too much down the route of a debate on the level of the issue ref the name and address etc, whatever the strict letter of the law says as it were - useful tho those posts are IMHO.

Given the post above by @duncombec about recent revenue enforcement activity on this line I can well imagine that staff (but I stress imagine) may not be giving much benefit of the doubt to people who say machines would not take my cash when they think they are about to get a penalty fare or worse level of enforcement....

Only the OP can judge what happened at the time and on the train and in discussion with the staff tho - but they would be wise to word their account in the light of this in case staff had eg body worn recorder etc in use during the conversation.

 

[Kate Anthony]

Right, so they've sent a letter asking for your account of events, as expected.

You might want to write a draft and put it on here so that people can give you feedback. You probably want to include some of the following:

• You tried to pay using a £20 note, which was the only payment method you had
• That note wasn't accepted by the machine
• The ticket office was shut
• You therefore boarded without a ticket and wanted to pay at the next opportunity
• A member of staff asked you for your ticket
• You explained you needed to buy one, as you had been unable to buy one at the station, but they refused to sell you one
• They demanded your details, which you did not want to provide as you did not consider that the member of staff was entitled to them
• You later provided them under duress

I genuinely apologise for my actions. I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, the ticket machine did not accept my 20£ note and the ticket office was also close but I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave the ticket inspector the note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding but he said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he ask for my details and proof ,I refuse at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when ask and I genuinely apologise for my mistake

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Oct 2021 ==

Some good additional advice in recent posts. OP needs to get the draft done so people can suggest amends on those points really (before we get too much down the route of a debate on the level of the issue ref the name and address etc, whatever the strict letter of the law says as it were - useful tho those posts are IMHO.

Given the post above by @duncombec about recent revenue enforcement activity on this line I can well imagine that staff (but I stress imagine) may not be giving much benefit of the doubt to people who say machines would not take my cash when they think they are about to get a penalty fare or worse level of enforcement....

Only the OP can judge what happened at the time and on the train and in discussion with the staff tho - but they would be wise to word their account in the light of this in case staff had eg body worn recorder etc in use during the conversation.

Hello,below is the reply I intend to send.


I genuinely apologise for my actions. I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, the ticket machine did not accept my 20£ note and the ticket office was also close but I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave the ticket inspector the note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding but he said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he ask for my details and a proof ,I refuse at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when ask and I genuinely apologise for my mistake

 

[Starmill]

whatever you thought, they were entitled to know your name and address, and it would help to apologise for not providing these immediately.

They're not entitled to know your name and address for the simple purpose of collecting your fare and selling you a ticket. Luckily in this country it is not a requirement to identify yourself in order to travel legitimately by train.

They might ask for your name and address to do that. But it's not a requirement.

 

[221129]

They're not entitled to know your name and address for the simple purpose of collecting your fare and selling you a ticket.

However they are if there is a reasonable suspicion you may have committed an offence. Such as in this case.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I genuinely apologise for my actions. I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, the ticket machine did not accept my 20£ note and the ticket office was also close but I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave the ticket inspector the note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding but he said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he ask for my details and a proof ,I refuse at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when ask and I genuinely apologise for my mistake

My emphasis. It's not the fault of the passenger if the SE conductor isn't selling tickets on the train due to covid. And surely, it isn't the responsibility of the passenger to go searching around the station, in the dark for a ticket machine that isn't clearly signposted

And I have travelled on this line on a few occasions in the last year and the conductor has been walking through selling tickets

 

[221129]

And surely, it isn't the responsibility of the passenger to go searching around the station, in the dark for a ticket machine that isn't clearly signposted

The law (as written) would disagree with this. But in this case is irrelevant as it was used.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Hello,below is the reply I intend to send.

I genuinely apologise for my actions. I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, the ticket machine did not accept my 20£ note and the ticket office was also close but I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave the ticket inspector the note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding but he said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he ask for my details and a proof ,I refuse at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when ask and I genuinely apologise for my mistake

Not sure why the OP needs to open by apologising for the TVM not accepting the £20 note.

 

[Starmill]

However they are if there is a reasonable suspicion you may have committed an offence. Such as in this case.

There may or may not be in this case, but there plainly is not in all cases where someone does not have a ticket. Therefore that alone is insufficient to determine the matter.

 

[MotCO]

Hello,below is the reply I intend to send.


I genuinely apologise for my actions. I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, the ticket machine did not accept my 20£ note and the ticket office was also close but I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave the ticket inspector the note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding but he said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he ask for my details and a proof ,I refuse at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when ask and I genuinely apologise for my mistake

Normally we say don't waffle and stick to the facts, but I think that some additions would be useful, such as:

• what time you arived at the station so as to confirm that you had allowed sufficient time to purchase a ticket;
• that you searched out the ticket machine (which someone else has said was a long way from the ticket office), which will show that there was no intention to avoid buying a ticket. Edit - did the machine give a reason it did not accept your £20 note? This would help verify that you actually tried to use the machine
• that you had no other means of paying (e.g. credit or debit card)

 

[AlterEgo]

You also need to come to your own view as to whether you did have a chance to buy a ticket. Obviously, you had your £20 note, which the ticket machine wouldn't accept. I think it's clear that the ticket office was closed at the time you were travelling. But did you not have a credit or debit card on you? If you did, then the railway will argue that you could have used that to buy a ticket.

The railway isn't in a position to know whether she did or didn't have a card with about £7 on it, although a court may or may not find it surprising if the OP's defence is that she had a £20 note and no other means to pay.

More important is whether "the machine didn't accept my note" constitutes the railway not being able to sell her a ticket, particularly as we have established there are two machines at Strood and the OP makes reference to only trying one. (Are they both accessible when the ticket office is closed?)

 

[Llanigraham]

Hello,below is the reply I intend to send.


I genuinely apologise for my actions. I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, the ticket machine did not accept my 20£ note and the ticket office was also close but I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave the ticket inspector the note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding but he said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he ask for my details and a proof ,I refuse at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when ask and I genuinely apologise for my mistake

Needs to be tidied up a bit, and punctuation added. I suggest:

I apologise for my actions on DATE.
I honestly wanted to purchase my ticket before boarding the train at 20:15pm, however the ticket machine did not accept my £20 note and the ticket office was also closeD. I was ready to purchase on board which I also gave OFFERED the ticket inspector the £20 note after explaining why I didn't get a ticket before boarding. He said unfortunately they aren't selling tickets anymore since the covid started and he askED for my IDENTITY details. I refuseD at first but later gave him my driving licence which I should have done when askED, FOR WHICH I ALSO APOLOGISE.

 

[duncombec]

[...] reference to only trying one. (Are they both accessible when the ticket office is closed?)

Not necessarily. The second may be available if the ticket office is closed, but only if the station building is also open. (one is inside, one is outside).

 

[AlterEgo]

Not necessarily. The second may be available if the ticket office is closed, but only if the station building is also open. (one is inside, one is outside).

Thanks for clarifying. It seems likely to me that in a place like Strood, the building would be locked when the ticket office is closed.

 

[Kate Anthony]

Not sure why the OP needs to open by apologising for the TVM not accepting the £20 note.

Thanks for clarifying. It seems likely to me that in a place like Strood, the building would be locked when the ticket office is closed.