Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Evening,    Please may I ask for some information re default markers on Credit Report ?    I had a CC with a Bank default around Jan 2014. Nothing was registered on my Credit Report The debt was later sold on a few times. Eventually to PRA in 2017 where it is unenforceable.   On my Clearscore report that I have recently downloaded it says “ In default PRA GRoup 5th April 2017”. when I click onto this it shows no markings on any month from 2014. so my question is can PRA register the default from 2017. I’m unsure if it drops off from The bank in 2014 or after PRA registered in 2017.    thanks for any advice you can give   
    • there you go all done i thought i could see you'ed left your reg number and their PCN number in your pictures.   there are quite a few threads here on this only allowed 30mins on certain esso forecourts total rubbish ofcourse  and none haver gone anywhere so far FWIW.   dx      
    • Highly likely providing you were the first private buyer to purchase the car with HP or conditional sale outstanding the solicitors will conclude that you have good title and act accordingly  As dx says let consumer law deal with this, keep the vehicle well hidden just in case but if you turn up at the sellers work and cause problems and the Police become involved  its highly likely you will be the one with big problems 
    • Seven years ago today this topic started 🤗
    • From Tuesday, the bank will alter the rate of cashback it pays on some bills - while doubling the monthly fee on its 123 Lite account to £2. The changes are disguised cutbacks. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

SWT I'm being SUMMONED in 6 days - First Class.


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3047 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi folks, I dearly need some advice. Yesterday, I received a letter, summoning me to appear before the Magistrates Court on Monday to answer alleged offences under Byelaws No. 19 and No. 23 (1). I'm very worried.

 

I had previously correspondended with the Prosecutions department (i.e. confirming my details and listing mitigating factors) but heard nothing back, until the summons.

 

The background to the summons was that I was travelling in the First Class cabin without a valid ticket, hoping that I could get an upgrade. The carriage was empty when I got on [and for 10 stops, thereafter] and believing that since my trip was 58 minutes long that a Commercial Guard or Revenue Inspector would have asked for 'tickets'.

 

 

The problems started that the eleventh stop. The carriage suddenly filled, and along came the Inspector.

 

 

When I asked for an upgrade, the inspector said 'No.' I asked whether or not they had ticketing machines on board.... to which their reply was 'No.' [nb: Ironically in the inspector's witness statement mentioned that their duties included 'issuing tickets']. The inspector clearly didn't like my questions...

 

Any way a penalty notice quickly became a report - which seemed disproportionate and unecessary. Needless to say, I felt like I was being treated like a criminal.

 

This is the first time that this has happened to me and I'd like to know whether or not I should plead guilty.

 

Are these strict liability offences or do they require intent? What would be the case if one or both applies?

 

Please help. Anxious

Edited by citizenB
addition of 'duties' - spacing for easier reading
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi folks, I dearly need some advice. Yesterday, I received a letter, summoning me to appear before the Magistrates Court on Monday to answer alleged offences under Byelaws No. 19 and No. 23 (1). I'm very worried.

 

I had previously correspondended with the Prosecutions department (i.e. confirming my details and listing mitigating factors) but heard nothing back, until the summons.

 

The background to the summons was that I was travelling in the First Class cabin without a valid ticket, hoping that I could get an upgrade. The carriage was empty when I got on [and for 10 stops, thereafter] and believing that since my trip was 58 minutes long that a Commercial Guard or Revenue Inspector would have asked for 'tickets'.

 

 

The problems started that the eleventh stop. The carriage suddenly filled, and along came the Inspector.

 

 

When I asked for an upgrade, the inspector said 'No.' I asked whether or not they had ticketing machines on board.... to which their reply was 'No.' [nb: Ironically in the inspector's witness statement mentioned that their duties included 'issuing tickets']. The inspector clearly didn't like my questions...

 

Any way a penalty notice quickly became a report - which seemed disproportionate and unecessary. Needless to say, I felt like I was being treated like a criminal.

 

This is the first time that this has happened to me and I'd like to know whether or not I should plead guilty.

 

Are these strict liability offences or do they require intent? What would be the case if one or both applies?

 

Please help. Anxious

 

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I hope the guys will be here later with comments for you and to help you understand what's involved with the byelaws. They should also be able to tell you what the rules are for upgrading tickets.

 

This has happened before and if you have a read around the forum, you should be able to see what happened to other people. One thing I have learned from the forum is that telling the company where they or their staff have gone wrong rarely gets a good result. Hopefully the guys will tell you a bit about what to say or how to go about this.

 

I also know it's possible to settle even on the day of the case if the prosecutor agrees.

 

Old-Cod-JA has a good sticky on going to court if you want to read it, on the titles page of this forum [transport].

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You say that the Penalty Fare notice became a report, may i be cynical and assume that you became awkward? TOC's do seem to be taking first class abuse very seriously these days and it is a byelaw offence to remain in a first class area without a "valid" ticket, valid meaning for the class, day, date etc... it is a strict liability matter so there is very little defence, if you wish to travel first class then you must upgrade before boarding the train unless you board at a station where you cannot purchase the relevant upgrade before travelling.

Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Honeybee13 and RPI. Yes, it would appear that by asking questions I became awkward. I appreciate the point about taking first class abuse very seriously. Does this mean that both byelaws are strict liability. If so then I don't think that I have a 'leg to stand on'.

 

Question: What about mitigating circumstances for the court? Can the abrupt and menacing behaviour of the RPI be such a circumstance?

 

1) In relation to Byelaw No. 19 - I had no choice but to remain in the seat whilst the RPI was answering and questioning me - he was blocking me in so that I couldn't get up; (I had no idea about the procedure and the RPI did not outline a) by what reason they were questioning me, b) my obligations under those reasons, nor c) what information he was entitled to ask. Instead went directly into "...I'm issuing you with a penalty notice."

2) In relation to Byelaw No. 23 (1) - I produced my travel photo i.d. immediately, when he'd asked. To which he then asked for another form of i.d.. I said that I didn't have one, to which he replied, "I don't believe you." (What else could I done to identify myself?)

3) All the while, the entire carriage had continued to fill up, insomuch that a first class passenger with a valid ticket, was still standing whilst the RPI questioned me.

4) He didn't remove me from the carriage until another passenger interrupted and requested that he 'take the issue, somewhere else'. As I did, under his direction, gather my belongings and leave the carriage, I apologised to the passengers in the carriage ("Apologies."), to which he said in a raised voice "I'm not apologising!".

5) He did not allow me to pay the penalty fine... by saying "It's too late for that, now."

6) His treatment of made me feel that he was deliberately singling me out, chastising and making a public example of me. My conclusion of this is that his actions became malicious

7) He failed to meet his organisation's charter, i.e. to provide their customers with "Friendly, helpful and polite staff".

 

I know this seems one-sided, but it was such a surreal and humiliating experience.

 

Actions: What should I do? Should I plead guilty? Should I try to settle out of court, by begging on the mercy of the Prosecution department? Should I contact the Court? Should I contact a lawyer?

 

Further thoughts and direction would be greatly appreciated.

Edited by TomT72
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your replies thus far and, yes, if asking questions about process and what the RPI was doing, you can safely assume that I had become awkward. As an aside - I admit, when someone challenges or charges me (as in this case), I feel I have a right to know a) under what reasons they are charging me and b) what the procedure is. Even the police have to expressly state such reasons and procedure - along with the challengee/ chargees rights and obligations. I received none of that, until begged answers to the questions.

 

Importantly, does that mean that both byelaws (ie. 19 and 23(1)) are strict liability offences? If so, then I may not have a 'leg to stand on'. What kind of mitigating circumstances could I give to the court, if I appeared with either a "guilty" or "not guilty" plea?. I know that the RPI and guards have a job to do, but if they are rude and increasingly malicious in their 'interview' count - not as a mitigating circumstance to the offence - but as to situation which gave rise to it?

 

There have been erroneous and misleading statements and omissions made on the witness statements (filed by the prosecution department), which don't match with my recall of the events - nor my statement to the prosecution departent. These include, not stating the he was an RPI and not a Guard (with a ticket issuing device), the procedure, what I was obligated to provide, nor what the RPI was entitled to receive from me).

 

I asked for an upgrade... nothing more.... operating under a misunderstandiing that I could buy one on the train.

 

In relation to Bye law 19 - I couln't get up from the seat since he was standing over me, whilst I became "awkward" by asking whether or not they carried issuing devices on the train (again, to which he said "No.") He still did not give me any explanation about procedure.

 

In relation to By law 23 (1) - I gave my travel photo i.d. upon request, for the RPI to inspect, only for him to ask for further i.d. I didn't have any, so I said so. His reply was "I don't believe you." [Now that, very much gave me great cause for concern]

 

What became obvious, was that his tone of voice became raised (bearing in mind it was a confined space, it seemed

a) immediately after me requesting an upgrade, said "No." he said "I'm issuing you with a penalty, I.D."

b) told me that they don't have a ticket issuing devices on board (which directly conflicts with their witness statements)

c) challenged why I was sitting in First Class [i.e. I accept the fact of the challenge but not the tone of voice]

d) Although there was a Guard, he didn't appear at all in the carriage (for the 40 or so minutes that preceeding the "interview" nor after)

e) There was no announcement to say that the Guard was on board, nor that he had a ticket issuing device

f) All throughout the "interview" this is what I noticed about this particular RPI:

i) his voice was 'loud' and consistent - his pitch had increased notably....

ii) he seemed either angry or at least very frustrated at my questions (which I made to him, only to understand what was happening)

iii) didn't notice or care that a firs class passenger had been standing almost 5-10 minutes while he interviewed me.

- Why didn't he remove me from the carriage first to both allow the passenger to take the seat and continue the "interview" in a more civil fashion. In fact he didn't remove me from the carriage untl until after another passenger intervened and asked the RPI to take the issue somewhere else.

iv) he accused me of lying (in front of the entire carriage) by saying "I don't believe you!"

v) and he shouted "I'm not apologising" when he misheard me beg my apologies ("Apologies") to the passengers in the carriage. He obviousl thought that I was demanding an apology from him - which makes no sense.

 

This was all so surreal and humiliating. Do some RPIs blatantly intimidate passengers on purpose? Why? I was dressed in a suit, with laptop - not like some under-dressed thug. (no offence intended).

 

What should I do? Should I enter a plea of "Not Guilty" and fight the allegations or "Guilty"? [At the moment, I am much of a mind to fight my corner - but the strict liability nature of the offence could dissuade me] Do I contact the court for proceedings information? Do I contact the prosecution department, begging their forgiveness and offering to sette out of court? Do I contact a lawyer?

 

Please, more advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

In relation to Bye law 19 - I couln't get up from the seat since he was standing over me, whilst I became "awkward" by asking whether or not they carried issuing devices on the train (again, to which he said "No.") He still did not give me any explanation about procedure.

 

In relation to By law 23 (1) - I gave my travel photo i.d. upon request, for the RPI to inspect, only for him to ask for further i.d. I didn't have any, so I said so. His reply was "I don't believe you." [Now that, very much gave me great cause for concern]

 

What became obvious, was that his tone of voice became raised (bearing in mind it was a confined space, it seemed

a) immediately after me requesting an upgrade, said "No." he said "I'm issuing you with a penalty, I.D."

b) told me that they don't have a ticket issuing devices on board (which directly conflicts with their witness statements)

c) challenged why I was sitting in First Class [i.e. I accept the fact of the challenge but not the tone of voice]

d) Although there was a Guard, he didn't appear at all in the carriage (for the 40 or so minutes that preceeding the "interview" nor after)

e) There was no announcement to say that the Guard was on board, nor that he had a ticket issuing device

f) All throughout the "interview" this is what I noticed about this particular RPI:

i) his voice was 'loud' and consistent - his pitch had increased notably....

ii) he seemed either angry or at least very frustrated at my questions (which I made to him, only to understand what was happening)

iii) didn't notice or care that a firs class passenger had been standing almost 5-10 minutes while he interviewed me.

- Why didn't he remove me from the carriage first to both allow the passenger to take the seat and continue the "interview" in a more civil fashion. In fact he didn't remove me from the carriage untl until after another passenger intervened and asked the RPI to take the issue somewhere else.

iv) he accused me of lying (in front of the entire carriage) by saying "I don't believe you!"

v) and he shouted "I'm not apologising" when he misheard me beg my apologies ("Apologies") to the passengers in the carriage. He obviousl thought that I was demanding an apology from him - which makes no sense.

 

This was all so surreal and humiliating. Do some RPIs blatantly intimidate passengers on purpose? Why? I was dressed in a suit, with laptop - not like some under-dressed thug. (no offence intended).

 

What should I do? Should I enter a plea of "Not Guilty" and fight the allegations or "Guilty"? [At the moment, I am much of a mind to fight my corner - but the strict liability nature of the offence could dissuade me] Do I contact the court for proceedings information? Do I contact the prosecution department, begging their forgiveness and offering to sette out of court? Do I contact a lawyer?

 

Please, more advice

The Byelaw had been breached (19), due to you having been in First Class anyway, irrespective of the RPI 'standing over you'. The Byelaw in question is to REMAIN in a First Class section, which refers to the time up until the RPI saw you I'm afraid.

 

In response to one of your questions, yes, the Railway Byelaws are Strict Liability offences, to which there's really no defence in this case I'm afraid.

 

Byelaw 23 relates to refusing to provide your name and address, and would come in to play as soon as you refused to provide your name and address, even if you came to your senses eventually. Having said that, if it was only an ID issue, then you have not breeched this Byelaw, as you are not obliged to carry ID. Did you initially say "no" when asked for your name and address? Please note that you are ONLY obliged to supply your name and address by law, nothing else, including your date of birth, although you will always be asked for this, and to be honest, you're only making yourself look bad if you fail to supply it as you certainly wont be incriminating yourself by supplying all the details the RPI requests.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept the strict liability type of the offences now.

And yes, I did say "no" when he asked for my address (since I'd already shown my named photo id) once he said that the issue was no longer a penalty notice, but rather a report . However, I said "no" to the report and pleaded to pay the penalty fine, to which he replied "It's too late for that" - his behavior tantamount to bullying and scare-mongering. That is when a passenger intervened and asked the RPI take the matter elsewhere.

 

Thank you for all of your posts. Also, after reding posts on several other threads, I have a much clearer idea about my rights and obligations (in specific relation to Bye laws no.s 19 and 23 (1).

 

I shall keep you all informed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any way a penalty notice quickly became a report - which seemed disproportionate and unecessary. Needless to say, I felt like I was being treated like a criminal.

 

[\QUOTE]

 

So, were you initially offered a penalty fare, with that option then withdrawn once the situation escalated?.

 

If so, the RPI may be willing to state in Court that they considered a Penalty Fare, but then decided it was against the.guidelines if they then felt from your answers & behaviour that you deliberately intended to avoid paying the 1st class fare.

 

You say you felt like you were being treated like a criminal.

If the RPI moved from a penalty fare to a report, and the prosecution dept. have asked the court to summons you, it appears they feel you were being a criminal, and there is the risk that a court may yet agree with them.

 

SWT have penalty fares on many of their services, was this service one covered by their Penalty Fare scheme?.

 

SWT do "Weekend First" upgrades 'at seat' : were you travelling on a weekend or Bank Holiday where you might argue they provide permIssion in advance to occupy a 1st Class seat and upgrade "at seat"?

If not eligible for "Weekend First" I fear that you'd be facing woes even if they hadn't gone for a strict liability offence (for example "why did you not upgrade in advance? Or seek out the Train Manager on boarding").

 

With the strict liability offence your perception of the RPI's manner may not get to feature : the court will wish to consider if the description of the strict liability offence was met, and if so, if any of the statutory defence(s) was met.

If yes to the former, and no to the latter : Offence made out.

 

You might ask the prosecution dept. or court to consider the RPI's manner, but would this stop you being found guIlty of a strict liability offence? I suspect not.

You might also wonder how often they hear "the RPI was rude" .... I'm not saying you are lying or mistaken, but how much mitigation you might engender from such a claim may well be influenced by how often they hear it from offenders!:

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is also worth noting that if you were 'awkward' as you put it, dependent on how this exchange went, the TOC may even have considered whether a further charge under Byelaw 6 might be relevant. It might help your understanding to view this from a prosecutors' perspective. Did you swear or use any offensive comment?

 

If the RPI had originally offered an opportunity to accept a Penalty Fare Notice, which would have afforded you 21 days to pay or appeal in writing, and you initially refused to accept that, it seems the report would certainly seem justified.

 

You were travelling in First Class and as I understand your post, no valid ticket was shown. You may have held a standard class ticket for the whole journey, but by your own admission you had occupied a First Class carriage for the vast majority of the trip and unless no facilities were available before starting your journey, it seems that there are no valid reasons why a First Class ticket could not have been bought before starting your journey.

 

A refusal to provide a name and/or address when asked is a separate offence in these circumstances.

 

The prosecutor will always question, where would the 'correct' fare have been paid if the inspector had not boarded the train and checked the First Class accomodation? You have not been charged with 'intent to avoid', these Byelaw offences are strict liability matters, but that doesn't stop the question being raised.

Edited by Old-CodJA
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to give you all an update to to thank you again for the earlier posts, when I noticed that two more Caggers added new posts (to whom I am grateful) and to whom I'd lke to respond:

 

i) the strict liability still stands - indefensible

ii) I do not see 'the RPI had originally offered an opportunity to accept a Penalty Fare Notice' as an offer nor an opportunity. [However, if that is the legal terminology used, it seems 'skewed' in favour of the company]. Instead, I perceived the that RPI had made a foregone conclusion that he was issuing me a penalty.... end of/without discussion.

iii) I didn't swear or make any offensive comment - and neither did he.... it was the total behaviour (raised voice, increase vocal pitch, frowning and snarling by the RPI, in front of all passengers) that I propose could be conceived as more-than-just offensive, but threatening as well.

iv) I did not propose 'awkward' as a term, in the first instance. I merely posed that such would be the case if the definition extended to include 'asking questions about [due] process and what the RPI was doing'.

v) 'unless no facilities were available' - apparently there were facilities on board, at the time and during the time of travel (based on the statements laid by the prosecution - they said that they made regular anouncements about a) holding a valid ticket; and b) that they were in the middle of the train if anyone needed assistance. I would agree to point a) refute point b).

 

Update: I contacted the Prosecution department. They - understandably - challenged me, sternly warned me about future travel arrangements by train, but finally offered a non-negotiable settlement. I quickly jumped at the opportunity and was told that the case will be dropped, after relieving me of an certain noticeable amount from my visa debit card.

 

I want to say that I have much appreciated your advice and direction and have taken some lessons away with me. Three, which stand out are:

...Lesson one: buy the valid ticket (with appropriate dates, times, carriage) before travel.... or obtain permission (obtaining proof, such as an upgrade ticket, in the meantime) from the correct 'authorised person';

...Lesson two: Know your rights and obligations; and

...Lesson three: don't ask too many questions

 

Kind regards to all

Link to post
Share on other sites
I accept the strict liability type of the offences now.

And yes, I did say "no" when he asked for my address (since I'd already shown my named photo id) once he said that the issue was no longer a penalty notice, but rather a report . However, I said "no" to the report and pleaded to pay the penalty fine, to which he replied "It's too late for that" - his behavior tantamount to bullying and scare-mongering. That is when a passenger intervened and asked the RPI take the matter elsewhere.

 

Thank you for all of your posts. Also, after reding posts on several other threads, I have a much clearer idea about my rights and obligations (in specific relation to Bye laws no.s 19 and 23 (1).

 

I shall keep you all informed.

You say that you felt it unacceptable, as did other passengers, that you were spoken to in a busy First Class area etc? If First Class was busy, chances are the rest of the train would have been much worse. Where was he supposed to move you to? At least there was breathing room in the Fist Class area.

 

Unfortunately, some Revenue staff can appear abrupt, but equally so, assertiveness can be confused for aggressiveness. I wasn't there, so can't comment on specifics, but I'd say 90-95% of the people who come here for advice, say that staff were rude or bullies. Maybe that's so, but I'd take an educated guess that because of the nature of their posts here, a lot of them are more than likely trying to make themselves look better, whilst trying to discredit the staff involved.

 

Just because you gave ID does not mean you don't have to physically state your name and address, especially if only a name was on the ID! For example, the address on your Driving Licence might not be your current address. Even though a legal requirement when driving, it's amazing the amount of people who fail to update their details with the DVLA. I assume he decided against the Penalty Fare when you were construde to be awkward in the RPI's eyes?

Edited by Stigy
Link to post
Share on other sites

know your rights!!!!! The law that governs is there for ALL to see in black and white and you agree to abide by the terms set out when buying ANY ticket, if only people would research the facts and read about restrictions etc before jumping on the wagon and blaming him and her before blaming themselves!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I am genuinely pleased that this Gagger was allowed to save his good name by settling out of Court, but not because I think there was any cause for the TOC not to proceed. It is in the hope that the re-education value of the exercise will not be wasted, but the vast majority of people who find themselves in this situation could quite easily have avoided it by a little attention to detail out the outset on any journey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Update: I contacted the Prosecution department. They - understandably - challenged me, sternly warned me about future travel arrangements by train, but finally offered a non-negotiable settlement. I quickly jumped at the opportunity and was told that the case will be dropped, after relieving me of an certain noticeable amount from my visa debit card.

 

I want to say that I have much appreciated your advice and direction and have taken some lessons away with me. Three, which stand out are:

...Lesson one: buy the valid ticket (with appropriate dates, times, carriage) before travel.... or obtain permission (obtaining proof, such as an upgrade ticket, in the meantime) from the correct 'authorised person';

...Lesson two: Know your rights and obligations; and

...Lesson three: don't ask too many questions

 

Kind regards to all

 

I'm glad to hear that you were able to settle out of court. If you still feel that the process was in any way unfair then you could write to your MP, perhaps referring to the recent Passenger Focus report 'Ticket to ride?' which is available online and rather critical of the way in which rail companies treat those found to be without the correct ticket. Nothing may come of it, but it only costs the price of a stamp and envelope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: I contacted the Prosecution department. They - understandably - challenged me, sternly warned me about future travel arrangements by train, but finally offered a non-negotiable settlement. I quickly jumped at the opportunity and was told that the case will be dropped, after relieving me of an certain noticeable amount from my visa debit card.

 

I want to say that I have much appreciated your advice and direction and have taken some lessons away with me. Three, which stand out are:

...Lesson one: buy the valid ticket (with appropriate dates, times, carriage) before travel.... or obtain permission (obtaining proof, such as an upgrade ticket, in the meantime) from the correct 'authorised person';

...Lesson two: Know your rights and obligations; and

...Lesson three: don't ask too many questions

 

Kind regards to all

 

Do you mind if I ask how much they charged? And how did you contact them, via telephone? I am in a very similar situation (train crowded, first class empty, but not allowed to upgrade) and would like to settle out of court, and offer them payment. In the past people have paid £150-200.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...