South West Trains, ticket for the wrong day!

[Whizzo]

Hi all;

Just thought I'd sound the forum out about a bit of a pickle my mum's found herself in. She bought a ticket from the machine at Axminster station for a journey she was planning to make to Basingstoke the following day. The machine is dreadful, a counter-intuitive mess of touch-screen craziness and multi-coloured buttons that's not easy to operate at all, even for a seasoned IT pro like myself. The staff at the station get loads of complaints about it but that's an aside. The upshot is that she accidentally bought a ticket for travel that day, and not the following day.

 

The next day the conductor on the train was all smiles, understood the mistake and let it go but obviously it didn't work in the barrier at Basingstoke, so one of the officers there came over. They were less forgiving, tried to get the full penalty fare plus an "administration" charge of some sort from my mother and when she rightly refused to pay it she had her name and address taken down. Two months later a court summons appears (the dates on it were all screwy, it seems that SWT had held onto it for the five weeks between the papers being prepared and then posted out). SWT want it heard in Basingstoke (£45 on the train), we want it heard in Axminster (a couple of miles away) but first and foremost we want this farce dismissed out of hand by SWT, as it should have been at the ticket barrier in Basingstoke in the first place.

 

Does anyone know of any legitimate grounds on which this could be challenged? Precedent? A breach of the maximum time limit between the offence and the summons? Letters have been going back and forth asking SWT to let this slide as the honest mistake it so obviously was but they're not budging an inch. Any help appreciated!

 

Thanks;

 

Henry

[jkdd77]

Assuming that your mother has been charged under railway byelaws, you could try arguing that you were given explicit (albeit retrospective) permission by the on-train guard to board the train and travel on that ticket.

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/regs/railwaysbyelaws.pdf

 

18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas

(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.

(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.

(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:

(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, he began his journey; or

(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or

(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket.

 

If she's been charged under section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889: Regulation of Railways Act 1889 (c.57) - Statute Law Database

 

it might be more difficult-if your mother genuinely believed that her ticket was valid when she boarded the train she would not appear to be guilty of an offence. Alternatively, she could try asking the judge for an absolute discharge, with costs to be awarded against SWT on the grounds of their totally unreasonable behaviour.

 

I am not a lawyer, though. You might be best waiting for the board experts, such as Old-CodJA, to chip in.

 

Best of luck.

[Whizzo]

Great stuff, many thanks. They're being really stubborn so if anyone has any more trump cards that would be great. I've also suggested that she append to the latest letter that when she wins the case she'll be opening a counter-claim against SWT for all the time and aggravation spent. Is it a good idea to up the ante like this?

[SRPO]

2 words.... "strict liabilty"

 

Really bad idea to threaten them, they do hold all the cards, best to show that its a genuine honest error.

[Whizzo]

Probably true. I just thought it might make SWT decide that if it did go to court, and if we did win, they might actually have to face some consequences for being so surly and quick to anger. Why can't we all just get along, eh?

[Old-CodJA]

Although at first sight these cases seem pretty straightforward, there are issues that make them less so.

 

Firstly, SRPO is spot on, threatening the TOC is a bad idea. They really do hold all the aces.

 

It is quite right to say that there is a strict liability requirement that every traveller must show a valid ticket where pre-purchase facilities were available before travelling.

 

1. Facilities were available. (No matter how unfamiliar the traveller.)

2. Your mother's ticket was not valid. (To be accepted as valid any ticket tendered must be valid for the class of travel occupied, the day, date, time of train and place of travel.)

 

If your mother received a Summons only 5 weeks after the event, the Rail Company certainly have not exceeded the time limit between the date of the offence and service of the Summons. The rule for summary matters is that the evidence must be put before a Court within 6 months.

 

The place where this is listed will be the Court in who's jurisdiction the alleged offence was detected. In this case that will be Basingstoke.

 

Bear with me for a moment as this explanation may seem a bit authoritarian, but I think it necessary to go through all the scenario.

 

Because it is alleged that someone else gave permission to use that ticket, that does not in itself validate the ticket.

 

Once it has been identified as invalid, there is a liability for both parties to put it right. That can be in one of two ways.

 

A.) If the Inspector believes your story, then the most usual and best action is for him (or her) to withdraw the ticket and issue a receipt or replacement without charge, retaining the original ticket to submit with his report in explanation. This allows the traveller to complete their journey without further difficulty.

 

B.) If the inspector does not believe your story, then he will either:

i) issue a Penalty Fare Notice (if this is in an area where such notices are authorised) allowing an appeal or payment within 21 days.

ii) Make out a report of irregular travelling that may result in prosecution if not resolved by correspondence.

iii) If he believes that you intended to avoid a fare by re-using a ticket or, using a reduced fare ticket to travel on an earlier train where a premium fare is payable, he would make out a report for prosecution.

 

A number of questions need to be answered now.

 

Firstly, if your mother bought the wrongly dated ticket accidentally from the self-service machine, when did she first notice it? If this was at the time of purchase, why did she not go to the SWT booking office and get it corrected??

 

Secondly, if this was noticed by staff at Axminster before departure on the following day, did that member of staff mark the ticket with his or her identity code to say they had accepted it as valid for travel?

 

If the latter was done, then there is little likelihood of success in any attempted prosecution.

 

On the other hand, in the absence of evidence that the ticket had been checked and accepted for travel and faced with the situation where your mother failed or, refused to accept a penalty fare notice allowing her the opportunity to appeal, I fail to see what else the reporting staff could have done, but to make out a report.

 

Now comes the really important bit. To prove that your mother intended to avoid a fare would be difficult unless this is a reduced fare ticket being used when a higher fare applied.

 

Section 5.3 of The Regulation of Railways Act 1889 is all about intent and the Rail Company would have to prove that your mother knew her ticket was not valid and that she knew she was avoiding a liability.

 

However, if she has been charged with the strict liability offence of failing to show a valid ticket on demand contrary to National Railways Byelaw 18 (2005), then that offence could strictly be proven. Her ticket was not valid for the date of travel.

 

I suggest that if she genuinely believed she held a valid ticket and can prove that it was accepted by a member of staff at Axminster, she should plead not guilty and it is likely that her mitigation will be accepted by the Court. It would also be a mistake to believe that you will be able to sue the rail company in this case.

 

If all is as you have described, I'm afraid that the Rail Company can correctly bring the case to Court. It is your mother who has no valid ticket.

 

If the Rail Company failed to win their case your mother would be entitled to claim only her out of pocket expenses for attending Court including any legal costs.

Edited June 10, 2009 by Old-CodJA

[Whizzo]

Thanks for the info, I've just been on the phone to Ma and she's having a look to see if the ticket was stamped. There's a photocopy around somewhere I believe. We wait with bated breath...

[68904]

What the guard should have done is give your mam and excess ticket for the outward and return journey.

If she had not paid the correct fare the guard could have ecessed the ticket and charged her the difference in the fare. Job solved.

I have 27 years service on the railways as a guard, but things have alterd all the TOCs want more brass whichever way it comes.

[Whizzo]

I've had a look at the photocopy of the ticket, the quality is pretty poor and it looks like it may have been clipped but maybe not... SWT have issued a summons to Basingstoke magistrates' court so we'll just have to see how it goes I suppose. The only defence we have is that the guard on board the train saw the ticket and approved it for travel but without a stamp and the name of the guard this doesn't sound like a card we can play. We could also argue that the guard didn't follow the correct procedure, i.e. withdrawing the invalid ticket and issuing a valid one in its place, but again, without knowing who the guard might have been that won't work either.

 

The prosecution is going to be made under Railway Byelaw 18(1). Does anyone have any experience of how these cases tend to go in the magistrates' court? Do the magistrates draw a speedy verdict from the "strict liability" case or will they weigh up both sides of the argument equitably? God this is frustrating, SWT ertainly aren't making any friends with these cases.

[i want justice]

SWT issued me with a penalty fare notice because I'd temporarily lost my travelcard as I'd tried to board the train with several large cases. As soon as I discovered it had gone I left the train and asked the first official I could see if I could buy another one. She sold me one and also said I'd have to pay a penalty fare of £20 but if I found the ticket or receipt I could appeal. So an hour later I found the ticket and receipt and then later appealed. Oh but what she said wasn't true - if you haven't got the ticket on you and have temporarily lost it it's no different to never having paid and the appeals people don't give a damn, all they want is your money. Even production of the ticket afterwards (plus receipt and full proof you paid) doesn't mean they will remove the fine. In the end I'd paid for TWO tickets, both identical, and am now having to pay the penalty fare too. I will then have paid OVER SIX TIMES THE PRICE OF THE TICKET. That's more than a real fare dodger would have to pay. I travelled in full belief the ticket was in my pocket. Within 3 minutes of discovering it had fallen out I contacted a member of staff to buy another one...yet I'm treated like a criminal and talked to by SWT as if I'm beyond contempt for being so dreadfully dreadfully careless that I let a heavy case knock my ticket out of a pocket. I've never been in a situation like this before, always paid for every journey I've ever made, never been treated like a criminal before, and I can't believe that the people at SWT are so money-hungry that they want to penalise people who can prove they are genuine honest fare-paying passengers. Needless to say I won't be travelling on a South West Train ever again.

[SRPO]

You should win your appeal as the inspector should not have sold you a ticket AND charged a penalty fare.

Its one or the other NOT both.

[Old-CodJA]

The prosecution is going to be made under Railway Byelaw 18(1). Does anyone have any experience of how these cases tend to go in the magistrates' court? Do the magistrates draw a speedy verdict from the "strict liability" case or will they weigh up both sides of the argument equitably?

 

Issuing a Summons alleging a charge in breach of National Railways Byelaw 18.1 makes this a strict liability offence.That means you are charged with not showing a valid ticket on demand by a member of rail staff.Your intention is not relevant in this case.If you do not deny being the person reported and do not deny the fact that that you could not show a valid ticket on demand, the Magistrates will find the case proven unless you can put an incredibly strong case in mitigation.

What the guard should have done is give your mam and excess ticket for the outward and return journey.

If she had not paid the correct fare the guard could have ecessed the ticket and charged her the difference in the fare. Job solved.

I have 27 years service on the railways as a guard, but things have alterd all the TOCs want more brass whichever way it comes.

 

I would not rely on anyone's assumptions to formulate a defence. I'm sure that 68904 will concur that his comment about what the Guard 'should' have done is has to be considered as individual opinion only. If your mother genuinely believes that she had bought a ticket valid for her intended journey, that she had done nothing wrong and had made every effort to put things right, then she should rely on putting that as mitigation against a 'not guilty plea'.I have to say that the odds will be stacked in favour of the rail company, but if she is genuine and can put over that argument well then she stands a fair chance of success. I must stress that this is personal opinion, but based on 30 years in the field of Railways revenue protection & prosecutions and as I said earlier, this is a strict liability offence. I am firmly of the opinion that trying to put blame elsewhere will not alter the simple facts that are charged and might well be counter-productive in the long run.

Edited June 21, 2009 by Old-CodJA

[Old-CodJA]

You should win your appeal as the inspector should not have sold you a ticket AND charged a penalty fare.

Its one or the other NOT both.

 

That is correct of course if the Penalty Fare Notice and the Fare ticket were made out for exactly the same journey. It can only be one or the other. However, there is a situation where a Penalty Notice and a fare ticket might be issued and I think it worth the explanation that might save someone money in the future. If a traveller were on a train intending to make a lengthy journey and is found to be without a valid ticket shortly after departure, the RPI may elect to issue a Penalty Fare Notice to the next stop of the train and to also charge the standard single fare from that point to the traveller's intended destination. This allows for the traveller to remain on the train and complete the intended journey otherwise, the traveller would be required to alight and re-book, then joining a later train to complete the journey. In some circumstances this penalty + ticket would be the cheapest option. For example, if the single fare for a whole journey might be £30 and the penalty fare will therefore be £60. If the single fare to the next stop of the train is under a tenner then the Penalty will only be £20 and add to that the single fare for the remainder of the journey, which might be £20 the charge (including the penalty) is a third cheaper than the penalty that would apply for the whole trip.

[i want justice]

With regards to the inspector issuing a penalty notice and selling me a new ticket I was only part way through my journey and I needed a travelcard because the whole journey was in the London area. I still think the system stinks. I'm all in favour of a system that fines people who are trying to dodge fares, that's wrong, but the way this rule is being operated penalises genuine and honest people even when they have tried to follow the rules and can prove they have done nothing intentionally wrong. Laws and rules need to be carefully written and implemented so that they catch the crooks that they are intended for and not so badly written that they penalise honest consumers as well.

 

With regards the lady who had a ticket for the wrong day, she too innocently broke their rules - but nevertheless had paid the full amount for the journey she made. Surely where someone is caught in this sort of situation for a first time and has a valid reason for it then there ought to be a little bit of discretion allowed? I've travelled with SW Trains for twenty six years and paid them thousands and thousands in season tickets over that time. I feel they've really let me down.

[Old-CodJA]

With regards to the inspector issuing a penalty notice and selling me a new ticket I was only part way through my journey and I needed a travelcard because the whole journey was in the London area. I still think the system stinks. I'm all in favour of a system that fines people who are trying to dodge fares, that's wrong, but the way this rule is being operated penalises genuine and honest people even when they have tried to follow the rules and can prove they have done nothing intentionally wrong. Laws and rules need to be carefully written and implemented so that they catch the crooks that they are intended for and not so badly written that they penalise honest consumers as well.

 

With regards the lady who had a ticket for the wrong day, she too innocently broke their rules - but nevertheless had paid the full amount for the journey she made. Surely where someone is caught in this sort of situation for a first time and has a valid reason for it then there ought to be a little bit of discretion allowed? I've travelled with SW Trains for twenty six years and paid them thousands and thousands in season tickets over that time. I feel they've really let me down.

 

I agree with the sentiment of your post, but please see where assumptions based on giving only a part of the information lead us.Your original post did not mention the fact that the penalty was for a part journey plus ticket. Having said that, I still agree with SRPO, your appeal should be successful if you can show the original ticket and proof of it being YOUR purchase and the original having simply been mislaid. As for the lady with the 'wrongly dated' ticket, I also agree that if all is as her son suggests, then she should enter a not-guilty plea and put her mitigation, but we must always bear in mind that in responding to scenarios posted here, we are all making some personal assumptions based on one set of suggested 'evidence' alone.Good luck with your appeal.

[i want justice]

Sorry if it was confusing - what I had was a travelcard for the whole of London for that day. I needed to get the train, followed by a bus, followed by another bus, and then another train. I got penaltied for the first train journey because I discovered my ticket was gone soon after starting out from home. However because it was a travelcard I had to pay the entire price of the travelcard again when getting a new one. The other thing is that I did appeal and my appeal was rejected this evening saying it was my responsibility to look after my ticket and if it wasn't on me at the time there are no grounds for lifting the penalty - the fact that I can prove I'd paid and temporarily lost it is apparently completely irrelevant. They obviously can't lift penalties just because people "say" they've lost their tickets, I understand that, but I don't understand why even when there is 100% irrefutable proof they'd paid they still won't budge.

 

The other complaint I have is that I've been talked to throughout as if I'm a criminal and liar. I really can't believe that accidentally losing a ticket is worthy of such venom from the staff of SW Trains. The penalty is one thing, the way they've talked to me and treated me is quite another.

 

However I really appreciate your comments, and the fact that you've taken the trouble to listen. I'm also pleased that you agree with the general principle of what I'm saying. I'm going to take it to my MP because even if I can't change my own situation I think something needs to be done to stop other law-abiding passengers suffering the same way.

[Old-CodJA]

Thank you for your comment and I have no reason to doubt that you held a ticket, but had mislaid it.

 

The rail operator is quite clearly correct in the assertion that they cannot accept appeals just because someone says 'I had a ticket'. National Railways Byelaw 18 requires that the traveller must show a valid ticket on demand.

 

However, my personal opinion is that where there is clear evidence that the fare had been paid immediately before travel by the individual who is unable to show the ticket, but that ticket is temporarily mislaid and found again shortly after, I see no reason why a Penalty should be upheld.

 

Was your appeal dealt with solely by SWT?

 

If it was, you should now write to The Independent Penalty Fares Appeals Service and explain the position, sending with your appeal a copy of the reply that you got from SWT. You should write to:

 

IPFAS

PO Box 14697

London

SE1 8ZJ

 

The Department for Transport guidelines for independent assessment of appeals state:

 

 

 

 

4.38 We consider that an appeals procedure will need to have the following features if we are to approve it as part of a penalty fares scheme.

• 
  
• Independence.The organisation deciding the appeals must be, and must be seen to be, independent of the day-to-day commercial management of individual operators. The cost of this organisation should be met by the operators, as it is part of the cost of using penalty fares as a way of protecting revenue. However, the funding of the appeals organisation should be independent of whether it accepts or turns down the appeals it processes.
  
• Clear criteria for accepting or turning down an appeal. We believe that appeals should be accepted in the following situations.
  

If an operator has failed to meet the requirements of its scheme, the rules or the regulations. For example, if warning notices were not properly displayed in line with rule 4, or the passenger could not buy a ticket because there were no ticket facilities available at the station where they joined the train.

Where appropriate discretion has not been used. For example, if the authorised collector has not used his or her discretion in line with the guidelines which he or she has been given.

 

 

 

In both cases, the staff who handle appeals must be given clear and specific criteria to decide whether a particular appeal should be accepted or turned down.

• 
  
• A consistent approach. It is important for both passengers and operators to know that any appeal will be dealt with consistently. We believe that the best way to achieve this is to have a single appeals organisation. Appeals are unlikely to be dealt with consistently if each operator handles its own appeals.
  
• Appropriately trained staff. Staff who deal with appeals must have appropriate experience and training.
  
• Access to the information needed to decide each appeal. The appeals staff will need to assess whether the operator has failed to meet the requirements of its scheme, the rules and the regulations. To do this, operators must keep records of, for example, the actual opening hours of ticket offices, when ticket machines have broken down, and so on, and to give this information to the appeals organisation when it is needed. Appeals staff will also need to assess whether an authorised collector has used his or her discretion in an appropriate way. To do this, arrangements will need to be made for authorised collectors and other staff to give their version of events to the appeals organisation when necessary.
  

Appeals must also take account of people's rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights. The appeal procedures must be compatible with these rights.

 

The Independent Penalty Fares Appeals Service (IPFAS)

 

4.39 Every penalty fares scheme which has so far been approved has arranged for appeals to be dealt with by the Independent Penalty Fares Appeals Service (IPFAS), in line with the IPFAS code of practice. We have approved this code of practice for the purposes of rule 9.

 

 

 

4.40 IPFAS is managed by SouthEastern Trains Ltd, but as a separate unit whose management does not report to the commercial director. When the Regulator asked for opinions from the public and the rail industry a few years ago, most people agreed that appeals must be dealt with independently and consistently, but there was little agreement on what the practical arrangements should be. Some people questioned the need to change what was already in place. Without a practical alternative offering any clear advantages, we believe that the current arrangements are satisfactory, as long as IPFAS:

• remains a separate unit, with its own accounts and a line management that does not report to the commercial director;
  
• continues to decide appeals in line with a set of specific criteria which we have approved;
  
• continues to be funded independently of the outcome of the appeals it processes, for example, by receiving a set fee for each appeal, no matter whether that appeal is accepted or turned down; and
  
• continues to receive enough funding to carry out its functions, while costs are fairly distributed between operators using the service. To make sure that this is the case, we have agreed the charging arrangements between IPFAS and the operators who use the service.
  

If you are still not satisfied with the outcome in this case after IPFAS have ajudicated, write directly to the Department for Transport.

 

When writing to DfT, you may wish to question whether IPFAS, as a part of the SE Trains set-up, can be seen to be truly independent?

 

You may also wish to write to 'Passenger Focus' although it has to be remembered they are little more than a pressure group and cannot overturn a penalty on their own. In my experience, you will get a far better response by writing directly to DfT and send your letter by recorded delivery.

 

Good luck.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Old-CodJA

[SRPO]

O.C. is sooo much better at this than me

[Old-CodJA]

O.C. is sooo much better at this than me

 

LOL! Thanks, but you know that's not true.

 

Your simple and very clear explanation of the Corbyn ruling on another thread made that obvious.

 

Between us, I hope that we can offer and maybe receive help as necessary, after all, I think that's what we all come here for isn't it?.

[neeze9]

Penalty Fare Notices issued by SWT appeal process are dealt with by IAS in Petersfield, you'll find the address on SWT website

[Old-CodJA]

Yes, SWT paperwork is now processed by The Independent Revenue and Collection Service. (IRCAS)

 

The address is

 

Revenue Protection Services

Appeals/Payments

IRCAS

PO BOX 212

Petersfield GU32 9BQ

 

Given that these services are supposed to be entirely independent, my earlier comment regarding a suggested query applies as the sharp eyed amongst you will undoubtedly note that independent appeals & payments are processed at the same place.

 

There are a number of such offices and each deals with the notices issued on different operators services.

 

For example, for penalty notices issued on the Docklands Light Railway you should write to

 

The Penalty Fares administrator

Docklands Light Railway

Poplar Depot

Castor Lane

London

E14 0DS

 

For penalty notices issued on London Underground the address is

 

London Underground

Penalty Fare Appeal Office

Pelham House

63/81 Pelham Street

London SW7 2NJ

Edited June 25, 2009 by Old-CodJA

[SRPO]

Just to add...the penalty fare adjudicators work to strict rules, if it was reasonable to expect you to have bought a ticket prior to travelling the appeal will be rejected.

They have access to a computer system that can check the status and operation of any ticket machine/office at the applicable time.

[i want justice]

Yes that's fair enough and of course you should buy a ticket before you travel...but I did buy a ticket for the journey and my appeal was rejected not because I didn't pay or didn't buy the ticket but because I accidentally mislaid it for an hour and couldn't show it at the appropriate time - I've just heard of a case far worse than mine where a penalty was being written out even while someone was still searching for their ticket. By the time the inspector had finished writing the appeal notice the passenger had found his ticket but was told it was too late because the penalty had been written and he'd have to appeal - he did and the appeal was rejected!! I was also told I could appeal if I found my ticket - they say it to get you off their backs because I gather appeals re lost tickets never ever succeed! Anyway there's not much I can do now other than complain to higher bodies in the hope other people in the future won't get penalised in the same way. Thanks to everyone for their comments and all the information - it's good to know there are some people around that are prepared to listen.