Penalty fare

[Thomask]

Hi

 

Firstly, please forgive me if I make any mistakes, as this is my first post.

 

Today my partner received a penalty fare on board a train from London to Brighton. She received this for not producing a valid 16 - 25 railcard whilst traveling on a ticket which included this discount.

 

She comes from Latvia, hasn't been in the UK long, and speaks very limited English. She did in fact have the railcard with her yet did not understand what the ticket inspector was referring to.

 

The ticket inspector was apparently rude, impatient, somewhat aggressive and used terms my girlfriend did not understand.

 

Together with my help we can obviously now prove she is the holder of a current railcard.

 

What are our chances of appealing?

 

 

Thanks

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome toCAG

I have moved your first post to the transport forum where you should get some help

[chief_inspector]

Hi thought i might help you out a little on this one.

 

I am a revenue inspector myself. This is a very common problem. On average a day i come across 3-4 people a day that have purchased a discounted ticket mainly from a ticket machine which anybody can do and get a dicounted ticket from the machine. Then the person gets on the train and when requested for their railcard the say ive left it at home, in another bag, etc. It is the responsiblity of the person who is travelling to produce the railcard on the spot> if they cannot then they are liable for a penalty fare or even possible prosecution. If you take a look at the terms of conditions on the back of the application form your girlfriend must have filled out it states she must carry it with her on EVERY journey.

 

Im not trying to be funny or anything but if she owns a railcard she must have a good idea of what it is when requested by an inspector no matter wheather your english is good or not. You have got the right of appeal but i can bet you £5 they will not budge and will demand the outstanding sums of money or if paid in full your not going to see the colour of it again.

 

If you need anymore help im happy to help.

[honeybee13]

Hello there and welcome to CAG.

 

Are you expecting a letter from the TOC? If you are, there's no point appealing until you receive that and the reference.

 

If this isn't the case, can you tell us a bit more please?

 

My best, HB

[Thomask]

Thanks for your replies.

 

To be honest, I was the one who obtained the card for her when she first applied. She barely even knows what an Oyster card is.

 

She was apparently ordered to pay the 'fine' on the spot (around £45) or faced a 'caution'.

 

She has a receipt from the card payment, the penalty charge notice, her original train tickets and her 16 - 25 railcard.

[Old-CodJA]

If a Penalty Fare notice was issued and paid in full at the time of travel, the matter is concluded from the rail company's perspective.

 

This does not prevent your girlfriend from making an appeal within 21 days of the date of issue

[SRPO]

Frankly, the chances of winning an appeal are zero.

The railcard has to be produced on demand, failing to do so leaves the traveller liable to penalty fare or prosecution.

[Thomask]

Apparently she did not understand what was going on and was threatened with police involvement if she did not comply.

[Old-CodJA]

Frankly, the chances of winning an appeal are zero.

The railcard has to be produced on demand, failing to do so leaves the traveller liable to penalty fare or prosecution.

 

Factually, that is correct SRPO, but from experience I have to say that there is always a right to make that appeal and the TOC has to consider all elements of the case.

 

If the traveller refuses to pay, what then?

 

I have many times in the past made clear the position according to the law, a valid ticket must be shown, but in this instance I think the appeal is worthwhile.

 

The TOC or their agents have to choose to either; 1) allow the appeal or

2) proceed to prosecution if it remains unpaid.

 

THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE

 

They cannot allege an intent to avoid a fare, the traveller paid the penalty

 

If they were daft enough to proceed, I guess that you may think they would be able to allege a breach of National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005) 'Fail to hand over a valid ticket' however, the TOC have already accepted a closure by taking payment

 

The traveller will show that they:

 

a) held a Railcard, but although she did carry it, did not understand the inspector's questions and effectively apologises for the fact that English is not her native tongue

b) paid the penalty fare on demand and can produce evidence of that payment

c) are a non-English national with short knowledge of the system and no previous misdemeanour

 

At worst, if the case was completely misunderstood - a conditional discharge would be likely , but I think it would be far more painful for the TOC

 

My guess is a severe castigation of the TOC by Magistrates for a complete waste of a Court's time and a wasted costs order imposed against the prosecutor and in favour of the traveller

 

The TOC do not have a case, but the traveller has a right of appeal and this is one of those that stands a reasonable chance of success if assessed correctly. I have seen a good many overturned in the past.

 

What do you think?

Edited October 6, 2011 by Old-CodJA
amended to clarify

[Thomask]

I have had the following information given by someone:

 

 

Hi

 

Thank you for sending in a copy of the Penalty Fare notice.

 

The Penalty Fare scheme is not supposed to be used against people who do not understand the system, for example because they are not from the UK or do not speak English very well.

 

I would send in an appeal, stating that you [the person who was issued the PF] are not from the UK and do not speak English very well. I would also put into the letter that you did not understand what the inspector was doing and also that they demanded the 45.60 without explaining why.

 

Also enclose a copy of your passport/ID card photo page to prove you are not from England.

 

Furthermore you were charged the incorrect fare, this therefore makes the Penalty Fare notice invalid. The correct fare should have been 22.90x2=45.80.

 

 

 

What do you all think about the last part of this reply regarding the incorrect amount being charged / demanded ?

[Old-CodJA]

Personally, I am sorry to say that I do not think the tone of that letter will get anywhere.

 

The reason I say this is because to get a refund, your girlfriend needs to get the reader on her side and you do not normally achieve that by telling them what to do.

 

So far as the rule is concerned, your girlfriend failed to comply because she did not show her valid railcard at the time of travel.

 

In a sense, it is not true to say the reason for issue was not explained either. If a penalty fare notice is made out, the reason for issue is printed on it and the traveller has 21 days to appeal that.

 

Telling the company that their notice is invalid because they charged you 20p LESS than they should have is likely to get laughed at.

 

I think that something along these lines has a better chance of success:

 

Dear Sirs,

 

I enclose a copy of a Penalty Fare Notice Number...........................

 

I have had help from a friend to write this letter because English is not my native language.

 

I have only been in this country a very short time and when I was spoken to by your staff I did not understand what I was being asked to show. This is because I could not clearly understand the inspector's speech.I have been told that there are some allowances in the Penalty Fare Rules to help with this sort of thing.

 

When I arrived in UK my boyfriend said I should buy a 16-25 Railcard to save some money on my train fares, which I did.

 

When the inspector on the train asked for my card I did not understand what he was saying. I had my card with me but did not show it because of this. I have enclosed a photocopy of my valid railcard with this letter.

 

The inspector kept saying that I must pay the penalty fare £45.60 straight away, which I did.

I now know that this was wrong and that I did not need to pay this money because I did have my railcard with me and I should have been given 21 days to appeal before payment was due.

 

I therefore ask that you refund the payment to me in full please.

 

Try something like that and if they fail to pay up within 21 days, come back and let us know.

[honestcitizen]

Please see my post about the Penalty Fare Regs 2002. This situation is covered in there.

[Grotesque]

The correct fare should have been 22.90x2=45.80.

 

I think they will thank you for pointing out their error, and send you a further bill for twenty pence plus admin. costs. Nice.

[honeybee13]

Please see my post about the Penalty Fare Regs 2002. This situation is covered in there.

 

Hello there HC. Do you mean a reply on the Penalty Fare Regs sticky or another thread here? A link might be useful.

 

My best, HB

[Old-CodJA]

I have already drawn attention to the guidelines and that is why I suggested the likely course of action at post #9 on 6th October

 

The point is that an overly aggressive 'spout' about non-existent 'rules' (the guidelines are often misquoted as fixed rules) will usually get nowhere and I agree with Grotesque's view

 

A more measured letter is much more likely to get a sympathetic responsand my suggestion is based on more than 30 years direct experience. It's worth remembering the appeal is read by a human being too. Start shouting the odds in an aggressive manner and many of them may look for every reason to decline

 

That's human nature I'm afraid.

Edited October 9, 2011 by Old-CodJA

[honestcitizen]

Sorry, I was only referring to the "rules" because CAGs sticky calls it the "regs" and I think others have referred to it as "rules". Actually the title of the document is "policy" so perhaps the title of the sticky should be amended?

 

In any case, it seems that the policy is not being adhered to.

[honestcitizen]

Hello there HC. Do you mean a reply on the Penalty Fare Regs sticky or another thread here? A link might be useful.

 

My best, HB

 

4.29 in the 2002 rules on the sticky:

"Season-ticket left at home. We expect allowances to be made for season-ticket holders

who, for one reason or another, fail to carry their season-ticket or photocard. The system

used by most operators is that a penalty fare notice will be issued, but no payment will be

taken. On two occasions for each person in any 12-month period, the penalty fare will be

cancelled when the passenger appeals. Some operators have procedures for cancelling

penalty fares notices without having to go through the appeals process and we want to

encourage this. The instructions given to authorised collectors must explain what the

authorised collector and the season-ticket holder must do in this situation."

 

And can I just point out that I wasn't suggesting writing an aggressive letter about this. Just pointing out the wording on the policy, that's all.

[Old-CodJA]

Yes, I do understand how incredibly complicated it can seem to those outside the industry

 

The various rules and regulations have a descriptive policy attached that may suggest a course of action and I agree that in this case it MAY not have been followed, but we only ever get one side of the story on here and in this instance, the original post is a third party explanation too.

 

As we have explained on other posts, the railcard and season ticket are different things.

4.29 does not apply to a Railcard

 

What I meant by 'aggressive letters' is that many people misread the rules, as you appear to have done, and then get stuck in to demanding that the TOC applies a rule that isn't relevant and demand cancellation or refund. That is not going to succeed.

 

In this case the penalty fare was issued for a justfiable reason, but so far as I can see, factors that became apparent AFTERWARDS suggest that it might be overturned.

Edited October 9, 2011 by Old-CodJA

[honeybee13]

Right, thank you.

 

As was pointed out on the other thread though, a railcard isn't a season ticket.

 

My best, HB

[honestcitizen]

Yes, I do understand how incredibly complicated it can seem to those outside the industry

 

The various rules and regulations have a descriptive policy attached that may suggest a course of action and I agree that in this case it MAY not have been followed, but we only ever get one side of the story on here and in this instance, the original post is a third party explanation too.

 

As we have explained on other posts, the railcard and season ticket are different things.

4.29 does not apply to a Railcard

 

What I meant by 'aggressive letters' is that many people misread the rules, as you appear to have done, and then get stuck in to demanding that the TOC applies a rule that isn't relevant and demand cancellation or refund. That is not going to succeed.

 

In this case the penalty fare was issued for a justfiable reason, but so far as I can see, factors that became apparent AFTERWARDS suggest that it might be overturned.

 

Thanks, Old-CodJa. I understand that the PNF was issued for a justifable reason in this and many other cases. The point I am trying to make is that there are situations in the policy (rather than "rules" - as has been pointed out to me) that would suggest that - as you say - factors become apparent afterwards to suggest that it might be overturned. But even if one writes a polite appeal letter (as I did on behalf of my son), the appeal can be rejected (as it was in my son's case). IPFAS does not seem to be following the policy.

[SRPO]

The problem is that the rail companies are privately owned & dont want to pay for errors made by of the public.

It may seem unfair that if someone makes an honest mistake by forgetting their railcard & has to pay a charge even though they show the card later, someone has to pay for the system to check that there really was a railcard.

The DVLA has the same attitude when people dont show their tax disc, pay a fine or go to court, even if you have a valid tax disc.

[SRPO]

deleted

[honeybee13]

That seems a good point to me, SRPO, hadn't looked at it that way.

 

I saw your post when you thought you'd lost the 13.35 one above. The system seems to be having an upgrade and lots of weird things are happening.

 

My best, HB

[honestcitizen]

The problem is that the rail companies are privately owned & dont want to pay for errors made by of the public.

It may seem unfair that if someone makes an honest mistake by forgetting their railcard & has to pay a charge even though they show the card later, someone has to pay for the system to check that there really was a railcard.

The DVLA has the same attitude when people dont show their tax disc, pay a fine or go to court, even if you have a valid tax disc.

 

That's a good point. Actually if they made a charge for checking the system, I personally would be far happier with that - that would be a lot fairer. It would be better public relations too.

[Old-CodJA]

Your son's case is obviously an entirely different case, the details of which we are not party to and as I said in an earlier post, we only ever get one side of the story on CAG.

 

IPFAS (The Independent Penalty Fares Appeals Service) will only get involved after an appeal to the TOC penalty fare administration is concluded and has been declined. IPFAS will be asked by the person to whom the PF was issued to consider a second appeal.

 

We have previously said that there are some concerns about the way that IPFAS is set up, but if a PF has been properly issued and is justified, they will uphold the penalty. It is not their role to automatically overturn the PF just because they are asked to do so and each individual case should be assessed on it's own merit, BUT if there is genuine good cause to cancel or refund then they will normally say so.

 

Perhaps your personal experience was different to the OP's case, but as we are not party to it then we cannot say.

 

Yes, I think the charging for checking process would be a good idea too. There are a good many flaws in the system that came about with the privatisation process, but I don't think we'll ever see that change.

Edited October 9, 2011 by Old-CodJA