Penalty fare

[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

[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

[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.

[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

[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

[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

[Old-CodJA]

Andrew Gilligan never condoned fare evasion.

 

His article was largely concerned with AVOIDING penalty fares and the best way to do that is to always travel with a valid ticket.

[Old-CodJA]

Yes, SRPO is right, there were copyright issues when this was first posted, which remain as far as I am aware, but more importantly, I would be very careful in how you interpret what is written.

 

This is particularly important where the article may be read to suggest that a traveller cannot be prosecuted for fare evasion where they fail, or refuse to pay a penalty fare.

 

That is not the case as many thousands of travellers have discovered to their cost.