On 10th August I was fined £20 by Central Trains for travelling without a ticket. The Ticket Inspector informed me that I had 21 days to appeal (which I did, unsuccessfully!) and that if I paid by card, the money would not be debited from my account untill the 21 days was up. However, the money was debited on the 22nd August, nine days early.

Does any know if they are allowed to do this, and if not how am I entitled to my £20 back?

I think you should have had a ticket

They should have taken the money when they said it was going to be, but you owed the £20, and the 21 days are long gone now. At the very best you might have been refunded just to pay again 9 days later...

Chalk this one up... make sure you have a valid ticket next time.

I think you should have had a ticket

quote]

 

 

True, and I'm not gonna argue against that. What annoyed was that by taking the monkey out of my account early, I could have been facing a charge from the bank for going overdrawn had my overdraft not been authorised. Can I claim back the interest charged by the bank for this overdrawal? Had they taken the money out when they said they would I would've had the funds!

did you get a charge?

did you get a charge?

Only a small amount of interest for going overdrawm, but surely thats not the point?

Only a small amount of interest for going overdrawm, but surely thats not the point?

My son travels several times a year by cross country trains and he has a young persons rail card. on September 4th 2009 he was re-directed through london euston he has never been asked to show his card so he put it in his backpack. when asked to see it he was embarrased because it meant he would have to take everything out of his bag to get it. on telling the ticket collector he couldn't get to it, he was issued with a 15 days notice to produce it. he sent the ticket from the Isle-of-Wight on the 9/9/09 by recorded delivery. I have just recieved a letter stating that he owes them £117.50 for the single fare from Stoke-on-Trent to London Euston. I know the royal mail have a dispute at the moment but 11 Days late!!! regards paddy:confused:

you have a proof of postage... have you checked if there was a signature, you can check this online.

As you can prove postage, you are protected by Section 7 of the Intepretation Act 1978, which means that they now have to prove that they didn't receive it, and proving a negative would be very difficult for them.

Interpretation Act 1978 (c.30)

References to service by post

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

Deleted.

Patrickomalley:

Proof of receipt is unnecessary when the letter is sent by recorded delivery:

Road traffic loopholes

Service is deemed service to have occurred even if it is not received. This is an irrebuttable presumption if served by recorded or registered post; rebuttable if served by first class.

The case law is Chiswell vs Griffen Land and Estate (1975), based on the virtually identical Interpretation Act 1889 legislation in force at that time.

Lord Justice Megaw said that "if it is proved, in the event of a dispute, that a notice was sent by recorded delivery, it does not matter that the recorded delivery letter may not have been received by the receipient".

As for proving the contents of the letter, this can be done by making a sworn affavadit or statement under oath, and is further supported by the fact that the inspector has seen the original ticket, that your son presumably has kept his original purchase receipt (right?), and that your son has no reason to send anything else to them.

Assuming that your son did indeed send a photocopy of the railcard with the ticket, then, under the circumstances, prosecution for failing to show valid supporting documentation [the railcard] at the time would be an abuse of process. This is because an authorised representative of Crosscountry has said that your son will not be prosecuted if he fulfilled a condition of sending the ticket and supporting documentation within 15 days, and he has duly fulfilled this condition.

Deleted.

What a load of BS.

If the OP follows your legal advice and fails, do you realise that you may have a personal liabilty?

Deleted.

If you think my post is wrong, (and perhaps my last paragraph in post 11 is indeed wrong, or at least overconfident), then why don't you make a constructive post setting out the reasons why I am wrong, and offering constructive advice as to the way forward for patrickomalley, rather than attacking me. It would be a pity for this thread to degenerate into a slanging match.

Im guessing you are not a lawyer.

Of course, anyone who has a legal problem ought to consult with a properly qualified solicitor, in preference to relying on unqualified and unsolicited advice from unknown strangers, which, although given in good faith, might not be correct. This is so obvious it hardly needs stating, and no liability would arise from mistaken advice given in these circumstances.

quote=patrickomalley;2447218]My son travels several times a year by cross country trains and he has a young persons rail card. on September 4th 2009 he was re-directed through london euston he has never been asked to show his card so he put it in his backpack. when asked to see it he was embarrased because it meant he would have to take everything out of his bag to get it. on telling the ticket collector he couldn't get to it, he was issued with a 15 days notice to produce it. he sent the ticket from the Isle-of-Wight on the 9/9/09 by recorded delivery. I have just recieved a letter stating that he owes them £117.50 for the single fare from Stoke-on-Trent to London Euston. I know the royal mail have a dispute at the moment but 11 Days late!!! regards paddy:confused:

I am not going to comment on the argument about claimed service of a railcard copy by post as it is irrelevent so far as the fare liability is concerned in this case.

The Railcard rules, which are accepted by the purchaser at time of application for the Railcard and signed for as accepted and understood as a part of the application process, make clear that the actual valid and in-date Railcard MUST be shown on demand at the time of the ticket check. These rules also make clear the remedy for failure to do so.

The traveller will be treated as if no ticket is held. In such circumstances the single rail fare will be requested and is due and payable.

The rail company is never obliged to accept a copy of a Railcard (or copy of a ticket) as proof of entitlement though I understand that the staff member concerned gave permission for a copy to be produced within 15 days. However, none has been produced to the rail company as yet.

There should however, be a record of the issue of the Railcard and if your son goes to the place where he bought his Railcard and provides information on the date of purchase and method of payment, it may be possible for him to be given proof that he held a valid one at the time.

It is up to the traveller to prove entitlement to the discounted fare, not for the rail company to do so. Your son claimed the discount on the ticket and the rail company is entitled to see evidence of his right to that reduction hence the Railcard rules.

The rail company has done their bit at present, they have identified that the person reported was travelling and failed or refused to show a VALID ticket on demand.

The OP is not entirely clear as it refers to 'sent the ticket'.

If it was a copy of the Railcard that was sent, but not by recorded delivery you should send another by that method. If the original Railcard was sent unnecessarily, you will need to do as I suggest and see if you can get evidence of the issue & purchase from Railcard records.

quote=patrickomalley;2447218]My son travels several times a year by cross country trains and he has a young persons rail card. on September 4th 2009 he was re-directed through london euston he has never been asked to show his card so he put it in his backpack. when asked to see it he was embarrased because it meant he would have to take everything out of his bag to get it. on telling the ticket collector he couldn't get to it, he was issued with a 15 days notice to produce it. he sent the ticket from the Isle-of-Wight on the 9/9/09 by recorded delivery. I have just recieved a letter stating that he owes them £117.50 for the single fare from Stoke-on-Trent to London Euston. I know the royal mail have a dispute at the moment but 11 Days late!!! regards paddy:confused:

I am not going to comment on the argument about claimed service of a railcard copy by post as it is irrelevent so far as the fare liability is concerned in this case.

The Railcard rules, which are accepted by the purchaser at time of application for the Railcard and signed for as accepted and understood as a part of the application process, make clear that the actual valid and in-date Railcard MUST be shown on demand at the time of the ticket check. These rules also make clear the remedy for failure to do so.

The traveller will be treated as if no ticket is held. In such circumstances the single rail fare will be requested and is due and payable.

The rail company is never obliged to accept a copy of a Railcard (or copy of a ticket) as proof of entitlement though I understand that the staff member concerned gave permission for a copy to be produced within 15 days. However, none has been produced to the rail company as yet.

There should however, be a record of the issue of the Railcard and if your son goes to the place where he bought his Railcard and provides information on the date of purchase and method of payment, it may be possible for him to be given proof that he held a valid one at the time.

It is up to the traveller to prove entitlement to the discounted fare, not for the rail company to do so. Your son claimed the discount on the ticket and the rail company is entitled to see evidence of his right to that reduction hence the Railcard rules.

The rail company has done their bit at present, they have identified that the person reported was travelling and failed or refused to show a VALID ticket on demand.

The OP is not entirely clear as it refers to 'sent the ticket'.

If it was a copy of the Railcard that was sent, but not by recorded delivery you should send another by that method. If the original Railcard was sent unnecessarily, you will need to do as I suggest and see if you can get evidence of the issue & purchase from Railcard records.

///////////////////////Reply\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

My son suffers with O.C.D and to ask him to turn his bag out is like asking him to strip to continue his journey.I think that Richard Branson has left a company with his good name in such a dreadful state because I have never come accross with so many nasty job worths. Anyway I cannot afford to pay it so I'm afraid you will have to bring it on!!!! regards Patrick.

 

///////////////////////Reply\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

My son suffers with O.C.D and to ask him to turn his bag out is like asking him to strip to continue his journey.I think that Richard Branson has left a company with his good name in such a dreadful state because I have never come accross with so many nasty job worths. Anyway I cannot afford to pay it so I'm afraid you will have to bring it on!!!! regards Patrick.

I wonder exactly how any unknown member of rail staff making a spot-check of tickets in accordance with the conditions of carriage can be expected to know that your son has a specific medical or neurological condition?

I have simply attempted to assist you in better understanding the legal position.

I have suggested an action that might help your son.

In the case of a journey between Euston & Stoke-on-Trent it is not me who will 'bring it on' as you put it.

It might be helpful to know your son's actual age if we were to be able to offer any more helpful advice.

unfortunately Patrick everyone who travels on the railway is required to show a valid ticket and supporting documents for their journey, posters have left useful information here for you to try to assist your case and to advise you of where you/your son stands legally but just because it's not what you wanted to hear you don't need to take that attitude.

Good luck with preceedings and hope that you have actually taken on board some of the things said here