What do i do?

[Fawkes Cat]

Assuming that Penalty Fares must be issued at the time of the incident (as I asked up thread, please can someone confirm or deny this?) I think you should also point out that your son was not on the railway when the Penalty Fare was apparently issued.

If Penalty Fares are meant to be issued at the time of the incident, then something that could explain the course of events so far would be that someone other than your son gave his details on 2 April. That someone would then have received the Penalty Fare paperwork. It's that paperwork - given by hand to someone who is not your son - which you have now received a 'reminder' about.

If that's the course of events, then that's why you should explain that your son was elsewhere: through no fault of you or your son, there's a mistaken identity.

This is speculation so I would advise against mentioning or suggesting this for now.

I take your point that it's speculation as to why the (assumed) incorrect issue of the Penalty Fare occurred, but it's not speculation that a Penalty Fare was issued. If the understanding in this thread is correct and a penalty fare can only be issued at the time of the incident, then explaining why it cannot have been properly issued (because the named person can be shown to have been elsewhere) is surely a very relevant thing to do at the first opportunity.

 

[Haywain]

Given that the letter the OP has received states, quite clearly, "it is not your responsibility ... to make payment", what would actually happen if the OP just ignored this? Perhaps @tspaul26 might have a view?

 

[Gloster]

It should be borne in mind that I am not an expert when reading the following comment.

Could the situation be that on the evening of day 1 the OP’s son, call him A, travelled from Buxted without a ticket as he was unable to buy one, was stopped and issued with paperwork by an RPI. On the afternoon of day 2 another lad, call him Z, travels from Buxted, was stopped and gave A’s name as his own. Before the railway had issued the letter to A for the original incident they receive what they believe is a report of a second offence by A and decide to drop further action on the original incident but treat the second more severely.

As said, I have no idea if this could happen and there is no need to explain why if it is a completely daft idea.

 

[fandroid]

I take your point that it's speculation as to why the (assumed) incorrect issue of the Penalty Fare occurred, but it's not speculation that a Penalty Fare was issued. If the understanding in this thread is correct and a penalty fare can only be issued at the time of the incident, then explaining why it cannot have been properly issued (because the named person can be shown to have been elsewhere) is surely a very relevant thing to do at the first opportunity.

The OP could add a statement to the letter saying in effect "my son did not travel on any train on 2 April". I don't think it's appropriate to provide any evidence to back this up yet. It should prompt GTR to seriously check the facts that they have, and doesn't allow them to nitpick over how convincing the OP's evidence is.

 

[ktiggeroo]

I take your point that it's speculation as to why the (assumed) incorrect issue of the Penalty Fare occurred, but it's not speculation that a Penalty Fare was issued. If the understanding in this thread is correct and a penalty fare can only be issued at the time of the incident, then explaining why it cannot have been properly issued (because the named person can be shown to have been elsewhere) is surely a very relevant thing to do at the first opportunity.

Absolutely. I was told on the phone by the payments department it had been issued in person. My son would have paid it or argued it if this had been the case but he was told he may not even get one and we have never received one. They can get them in the post rather than In person so I am assuming that for some reason it may have been sent on the post but we didn't even get it and neither did the other boy and one of them hasn't had a single correspondence even though it was all one incident. Seems to be just a massive cock up especially as the date and time are wrong. As I pointed out in another comment I don't know if you read but I have checked the times on the day they said they gave the penalty and the train didn't even leave the station until q5 mins after they allege they gave it!

 

[Doubleplus]

It is surely as simple as the fact that the person in question did not travel on the railway at any time on the date that the train company is claiming. That is an absolute defence to the allegation and therefore no fine is warranted or justifiable.

Hence, thank you and good day? In the general spirit of any legal dealings, answer only the question that is asked.

That an unusual journey took place on a different day is not at issue. But in the context of that journey, the travel was legitimate (due to the non-working ticket machine) and an explanation was given to the on-train staff, who themselves only took the details and said that they would "possibly" get a letter or a fine "but probably not". As such they are surely entitled to rely on the advice given by the railway staff, and their own knowledge that they have done nothing wrong, so therefore no need to suddenly start pleading guilty to incorrect allegations of fare-dodging that occured on dates and times when they were not present on the railway, and definitely no need to pay any fines that were not even issued.

Would welcome other thoughts on this, but I would have thought that a plain denial is all that is required here. No need to complicate the matter with other anecdotes about travel on other days, unless and until an allegation is made about that particular day's travel.

 

[AdamWW]

It is surely as simple as the fact that the person in question did not travel on the railway at any time on the date that the train company is claiming. That is an absolute defence to the allegation and therefore no fine is warranted or justifiable.

Hence, thank you and good day? In the general spirit of any legal dealings, answer only the question that is asked.

That an unusual journey took place on a different day is not at issue. But in the context of that journey, the travel was legitimate (due to the non-working ticket machine) and an explanation was given to the on-train staff, who themselves only took the details and said that they would "possibly" get a letter or a fine "but probably not". As such they are surely entitled to rely on the advice given by the railway staff, and their own knowledge that they have done nothing wrong, so therefore no need to suddenly start pleading guilty to incorrect allegations of fare-dodging that occured on dates and times when they were not present on the railway, and definitely no need to pay any fines that were not even issued.

Would welcome other thoughts on this, but I would have thought that a plain denial is all that is required here. No need to complicate the matter with other anecdotes about travel on other days, unless and until an allegation is made about that particular day's travel.

I am not an expert.....but that is what I would do.

 

[fandroid]

It is surely as simple as the fact that the person in question did not travel on the railway at any time on the date that the train company is claiming. That is an absolute defence to the allegation and therefore no fine is warranted or justifiable.

Hence, thank you and good day? In the general spirit of any legal dealings, answer only the question that is asked.

That an unusual journey took place on a different day is not at issue. But in the context of that journey, the travel was legitimate (due to the non-working ticket machine) and an explanation was given to the on-train staff, who themselves only took the details and said that they would "possibly" get a letter or a fine "but probably not". As such they are surely entitled to rely on the advice given by the railway staff, and their own knowledge that they have done nothing wrong, so therefore no need to suddenly start pleading guilty to incorrect allegations of fare-dodging that occured on dates and times when they were not present on the railway, and definitely no need to pay any fines that were not even issued.

Would welcome other thoughts on this, but I would have thought that a plain denial is all that is required here. No need to complicate the matter with other anecdotes about travel on other days, unless and until an allegation is made about that particular day's travel.

If the OP decides to take that path, I would suggest that they also state that no previous Penalty Fare Notice has been received in person or by post. My thoughts are that the reminder letter is flawed, not only on the date and time, but also in assuming that a Penalty Fare Notice was ever given or sent to the OP's son.

They might be accustomed to simple denials and routinely plough on with their demands. Pointing out that they've entirely messed up might halt their efforts.

For what it's worth, I suspect that this is just a GTR fishing expedition inspired by someone in the office trying to bully some cash out of the OP.

 

[robbeech]

Yes I know what they are charging for but we didn't get the penalty in the beginning and date and time are wrong on this notice .

I believe their point here is that in a previous post (that they quote) your son was told they may receive a penalty of £20 which regardless of how you look at it is outdated information, it’s sadly unsurprising that revenue staff would get this wrong as it appears between them and their colleagues they appear to have got a lot wrong.

The letter you have received is a “reminder” to pay a penalty for a journey that was not made by the person named on it.

Whilst it’s important that you have discussed it here and received a selection of good advice about potential further steps, in my opinion the key thing here is to respond to the letter with information about the letter.
* No journey was taken on the date and time in question.
* You can provide evidence that your son was not on a train at that time on that day.
* You are concerned that this is labelled as a ‘reminder’ when you have had no previous letters.

Once you provide this response and you get a reply (you may not do) then you can look at next possible steps.

 

[ktiggeroo]

It is surely as simple as the fact that the person in question did not travel on the railway at any time on the date that the train company is claiming. That is an absolute defence to the allegation and therefore no fine is warranted or justifiable.

Hence, thank you and good day? In the general spirit of any legal dealings, answer only the question that is asked.

That an unusual journey took place on a different day is not at issue. But in the context of that journey, the travel was legitimate (due to the non-working ticket machine) and an explanation was given to the on-train staff, who themselves only took the details and said that they would "possibly" get a letter or a fine "but probably not". As such they are surely entitled to rely on the advice given by the railway staff, and their own knowledge that they have done nothing wrong, so therefore no need to suddenly start pleading guilty to incorrect allegations of fare-dodging that occured on dates and times when they were not present on the railway, and definitely no need to pay any fines that were not even issued.

Would welcome other thoughts on this, but I would have thought that a plain denial is all that is required here. No need to complicate the matter with other anecdotes about travel on other days, unless and until an allegation is made about that particular day's travel.

You are absolutely right! To begin with I hadn't realised the date was different until actually speaking to my son. I have then done nothing but over think it. I am autistic and my life is very black and white and even though I totally agree with what you say my personality and mind have to resist the urge to demand things are done correctly lol. It is not a trait I like of myself because it causes unnecessary stress for me when all I need to do as you and others have suggested is dispute the fact the date and time are inaccurate therefore the even couldn't have even taken place when they say. I will definitely take your advise and others have have also affected this and only dispute the fact I can prove he didn't travel at that day and time and also that a ticket couldn't have been given to anyone because the train didn't physically leave until 15 minutes later. Thank you so much for.your detailed reply. It is much appreciated.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Apr 2023 ==

I believe their point here is that in a previous post (that they quote) your son was told they may receive a penalty of £20 which regardless of how you look at it is outdated information, it’s sadly unsurprising that revenue staff would get this wrong as it appears between them and their colleagues they appear to have got a lot wrong.

The letter you have received is a “reminder” to pay a penalty for a journey that was not made by the person named on it.

Whilst it’s important that you have discussed it here and received a selection of good advice about potential further steps, in my opinion the key thing here is to respond to the letter with information about the letter.
* No journey was taken on the date and time in question.
* You can provide evidence that your son was not on a train at that time on that day.
* You are concerned that this is labelled as a ‘reminder’ when you have had no previous letters.

Once you provide this response and you get a reply (you may not do) then you can look at next possible steps.

You are right and I thank you for taking the time to reply. I have had so much helpful advise from here and I really am grateful so shall take the advise and query the fact he wasn't on the train on the day and time they have said and I can prove it and will go from there. I over think things, it isn't something I like doing but don't like things when they are not black and white. This group has been superb and I Will listen to the advice given. Thank you

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Apr 2023 ==

Given that the letter the OP has received states, quite clearly, "it is not your responsibility ... to make payment", what would actually happen if the OP just ignored this? Perhaps @tspaul26 might have a view?

I was told he would get a bigger fine and then it would go against him possibly when he is 18 and wanting tk travel by train. I totally understand most would just ignore it on that basis but the other parent paid it without looking into it and now realises they shouldn't so I just rhoyght about the amount of people that must do this and wanted I suppose to prove the system in this case and probably lots of others is wrong and in theory scamming people! Not much fight I know and I won't win but I wanted to try and get the truth anyway. More stress than I need to I am going to take everyone's advice and point out my son wasn't on the train on that day and time and the train didn't even leave until 15 minutes later and leave it at that. Lol. Sometimes I need to remember that life is just rubbish and unfair and that is just the way it is! Thank you

 

[Cantab26]

Given that the letter the OP has received states, quite clearly, "it is not your responsibility ... to make payment", what would actually happen if the OP just ignored this? Perhaps @tspaul26 might have a view?

I was told he would get a bigger fine and then it would go against him possibly when he is 18 and wanting tk travel by train. I totally understand most would just ignore it on that basis but the other parent paid it without looking into it and now realises they shouldn't so I just rhoyght about the amount of people that must do this and wanted I suppose to prove the system in this case and probably lots of others is wrong and in theory scamming people! Not much fight I know and I won't win but I wanted to try and get the truth anyway. More stress than I need to I am going to take everyone's advice and point out my son wasn't on the train on that day and time and the train didn't even leave until 15 minutes later and leave it at that. Lol. Sometimes I need to remember that life is just rubbish and unfair and that is just the way it is! Thank you

In this particular case, there is a benefit to sending a brief letter as set out in previous posts rather than ignoring it completely - whilst ignoring it is low risk for the mother, this is not necessarily the case for the son.

There are three main benefits to sending the letter:

1. It may cause the TOC to check its files and close the case.
2. If 1. happens, the OP can then follow up with more robust demands for any records to be deleted and/or marked as ‘no wrongdoing’, as opposed to just ‘no further action’.
3. If the TOC is foolish enough to attempt to escalate the matter, it lays some procedural bear traps for them down the line which would be to the advantage of the OP and her son.

 

[Scott R]

You may be right. There will be people here far more knowledgable than me on this matter.

(Though maybe the railway company should be fined £100 for clerical errors, reduced to £50 if they pay promptly?)

 

[ktiggeroo]

Would.be nice if they would pay up wouldn't it lol

 

[66701GBRF]

I am not a lawyer or clued up on ticketing matters but I cannot see how a prosecution can be successful with a completely incorrect time and date. I wouldn't write to the company and say the date is wrong and I wouldn't mention anything about travelling on the 1st, I'd write and say your son was at home and that you have proof to that fact.

 

[robbeech]

I am not a lawyer or clued up on ticketing matters but I cannot see how a prosecution can be successful with a completely incorrect time and date.

A prosecution in court wouldn’t be successful, but this isn’t going to court yet so the railway (or indeed anyone else) can send a demand to anyone, anywhere for any sum at anytime if it so wishes. If they come across aggressive and demanding enough many people will just pay up (like the friend’s parents did) as they do not realise their rights.

 

[gray1404]

You are not even obliged to enter into correspondence with the railway company about this.

 

[MotCO]

I'm just wondering why the ticket inspectors did not believe the TVM at Buxted was not working. If the Train Operating Company believe the offence took place on the Sunday, it is possible that the TVM was working then, hence why they are pursuing the case. On Saturday, when the OP's son was actually travelling, the TOC may know that the TVM was not working, but that was not the date on their records when the alleged offence took place.

The Southern website https://www.southeasternrailway.co....avel-help/station-information/stations/buxted confirms that the ticket office was not open on the Saturday evening, nor on Sunday at the time of the alleged incident.

 

[nanstallon]

What a ridiculous kerfuffle over a £1.50 fare! As they give the wrong date and time, I'd just reply to the effect that the boy was not travelling at the date and time alleged, and leave it at that. I see no point in going into any detail about him travelling on another date or ever having used the train at all; it is their job to prove the offence so why help them?

 

[ktiggeroo]

Thank you everyone who has helped. We relieved a final demand today and still no appeal info so I went onto the lage someone here told me too and this time it worked. The funny thing is the penalty fare notice according to the appeal page was issued at uckfield not even Buxted at 15.03pm but the train didnt even get there until 15.22 so as someone here advised we argued that he wasn't on the train that day and we aren't sure how he could get a penalty fare on a train that hadn't even left the station at Buxted when he was apparently issued it. We left out all.other info so it didn't complicate things. One of the other kids never even received a demand letter so there is a big mistake somewhere. I don't use trains to this has all been completely alien to me and a bit overwhelming for a 14 year old going one stop who was unable to buy a ticket as the machine was broken on the say before! Thanks again for all the advise and fingers crossed we won't be going to court as they have suggested lol

 

[ktiggeroo]

Hi everyone. I listened to everyone here and sent an appeal and kept it simple. I just stated that my son wasn't on the train on the date they put and also said thst the train didnt actually leave the station until 15 later than the penalty fare was supposedly given. Just got a very unhelpful email saying we now needed to write the the recovery company if we feel someone has given false information! It never even acknowledge the fact the train hadn't even left at the time they said. Can anyone advise next. My poor son is really stressing and is now expected to write a letter to the recovery place ! Please find attached the letter received

 

[WesternLancer]

Hi everyone. I listened to everyone here and sent an appeal and kept it simple. I just stated that my son wasn't on the train on the date they put and also said thst the train didnt actually leave the station until 15 later than the penalty fare was supposedly given. Just got a very unhelpful email saying we now needed to write the the recovery company if we feel someone has given false information! It never even acknowledge the fact the train hadn't even left at the time they said. Can anyone advise next. My poor son is really stressing and is now expected to write a letter to the recovery place ! Please find attached the letter received

Not 100% sure but I think you / your son now need to write 2 letters stating the same thing
- 1 letter to DRP as advised
- 1 letter to Southern's Revenue Protection Team

Both enclosing a copy of the letter from Penalty Services and a copy of the letter setting out the appeal grounds that you sent to Penalty Services before. The content needs to be as per your last appeal - ie son not on the train on that date so could not be him - so the story is consistent with the previous situation.

You need to send these in such a way you get proof of delivery (signed for) from Royal Mail - you need to keep copies of everything and you need to keep copies of the proof of delivery

They need to be short letters, set out formally.

I know this will be tedious but you need to get the case off this conveyor belt which probably means Southern need to drop it on the basis that you have stated in that appeal.

 

[ktiggeroo]

Not 100% sure but I think you / your son now need to write 2 letters stating the same thing
- 1 letter to DRP as advised
- 1 letter to Southern's Revenue Protection Team

Both enclosing a copy of the letter from Penalty Services and a copy of the letter setting out the appeal grounds that you sent to Penalty Services before. The content needs to be as per your last appeal - ie son not on the train on that date so could not be him - so the story is consistent with the previous situation.

You need to send these in such a way you get proof of delivery (signed for) from Royal Mail - you need to keep copies of everything and you need to keep copies of the proof of delivery

They need to be short letters, set out formally.

I know this will be tedious but you need to get the case off this conveyor belt which probably means Southern need to drop it on the basis that you have stated in that appeal.

Thank you. It's just so annoying they haven't even read the appeal correctly as we didn't say at any point wr thought someone had given false details only that he wasn't on the train and it annoys me they don't seem to have even noticed that NO penalty fare could have been given at 15.03pm when the train didnt even leave until 15.18. Just seems such a lack of common sense and hassle for what should have been a £1.50 fare . Thank you for your advise and I will certainly do what you have said

 

[WesternLancer]

Thank you. It's just so annoying they haven't even read the appeal correctly as we didn't say at any point wr thought someone had given false details only that he wasn't on the train and it annoys me they don't seem to have even noticed that NO penalty fare could have been given at 15.03pm when the train didnt even leave until 15.18. Just seems such a lack of common sense and hassle for what should have been a £1.50 fare . Thank you for your advise and I will certainly do what you have said

I know - it is v annoying, but I guess they will have a set of responses and basically they are not accepting the Penalty Fare was not issued or not issued correctly, just accepting that it maybe was not issued to your son, so that goes in the send the 'standard impersonating someone else' reply letter pile - hence what you have received.

I guess 'it wasn't me on that train' is perhaps not a valid basis for an 'Appeal' or some such, and Penalty Services just deal with 'Appeals'. It's Southern staff who are supposed to issue the Penalty Fares correctly.

 

[ktiggeroo]

I know - it is v annoying, but I guess they will have a set of responses and basically they are not accepting the Penalty Fare was not issued or not issued correctly, just accepting that it maybe was not issued to your son, so that goes in the send the 'standard impersonating someone else' reply letter pile - hence what you have received.

I guess 'it wasn't me on that train' is perhaps not a valid basis for an 'Appeal' or some such, and Penalty Services just deal with 'Appeals'. It's Southern staff who are supposed to issue the Penalty Fares correctly.

Thank you. I guess I am just annoyed they haven't looked into the fact the time was wrong therefor maybe the fare was wrong in the first place ( which is true) but it is more frustrating having to get a 14 year old to jump through all these hoops! Thanks again. I really appreciate your help.

 

[Haywain]

Thank you. I guess I am just annoyed they haven't looked into the fact the time was wrong therefor maybe the fare was wrong in the first place ( which is true) but it is more frustrating having to get a 14 year old to jump through all these hoops! Thanks again. I really appreciate your help.

If it wasn't issued to the right person, the time is not important or even relevant.

 

[ktiggeroo]

If it wasn't issued to the right person, the time is not important or even relevant.

I was trying to prove that them saying he was given one in person is rubbish given no one could be given one at that time because the train wasn't even there! No one falsely gave his details an incident did happen which I have explained in the original post but not as they are saying and not on the date and time they said so I am trying to show their incompetence and the fact it is all Incorrect.

 

[Cantab26]

I was trying to prove that them saying he was given one in person is rubbish given no one could be given one at that time because the train wasn't even there! No one falsely gave his details an incident did happen which I have explained in the original post but not as they are saying and not on the date and time they said so I am trying to show their incompetence and the fact it is all Incorrect.

You are over complicating things.

If your son was not travelling on the date and at the time when the penalty fare was issued then that is sufficient. Everything else is unnecessary and may well cause confusion or difficulties of another sort.

You may need to set out this evidence in a formal statutory declaration - which will be neither expensive nor difficult to obtain - in order to ram home the point.

 

[Haywain]

You are over complicating things.

If your son was not travelling on the date and at the time when the penalty fare was issued then that is sufficient. Everything else is unnecessary and may well cause confusion or difficulties of another sort.

You may need to set out this evidence in a formal statutory declaration - which will be neither expensive nor difficult to obtain - in order to ram home the point.

In the other hand, if the son was travelling, then it needs to be clarified that the appeal is on the basis of the Penalty Fare being incorrectly issued, although I don't know if a slightly incorrect time* is sufficient for an appeal to succeed.

*And wrong date.

 

[WesternLancer]

In the other hand, if the son was travelling, then it needs to be clarified that the appeal is on the basis of the Penalty Fare being incorrectly issued, although I don't know if a slightly incorrect time is sufficient for an appeal to succeed.

IIRC correctly the son was at home and mowing the lawn that day (or being hassled to mow the lawn by the OP, his mum), and not travelling - tho the case has got quite long so apols if I have misrecalled what @ktiggeroo set out earlier on up thread

 

[Cantab26]

In the other hand, if the son was travelling, then it needs to be clarified that the appeal is on the basis of the Penalty Fare being incorrectly issued, although I don't know if a slightly incorrect time is sufficient for an appeal to succeed.

IIRC correctly the son was at home and mowing the lawn that day (or being hassled to mow the lawn by the OP, his mum), and not travelling - tho the case has got quite long so apols if I have misrecalled what @ktiggeroo set out earlier on up thread

This is indeed the position stated upthread.

That being the case, anything other than ‘son was not travelling at all when the penalty fare was issued’ (potentially as a statutory declaration to give it more formal weight) is all that need be said. Anything else merely over complicated matters.