Penalty fare for wrong ticket, potentially off route

[Bletchleyite]

No, but they slapped the ticket charge on top of the penelty fare. We ended up buying another single home because it saved us a 30 minute wait for the one back via runcorn - of course no one checked our tickets on the way back.

Did you use the fare-dodger's lift? Otherwise, all the central Liverpool stations have gatelines so you'll have been checked to get inside those!

 

[JohnJBC]

Ok, below is a draft of my indended appeal statement. Any comments / improvements appreciated. Once again, thanks to everyone who has commented on this thread. It's been fantastic to be able to get some advice and opinions from people in the know on these things!
----
Reason for appeal: penalty incorrectly issued. On 18/04/24 my partner and I travelled between Chester and Liverpool lime street by train (leaving 11:01am). We booked tickets via thetrainline.com while we were walking to the station. We did not realise there were two different routes available between Chester and Lime Street and purchased tickets with a route via Runcorn. There was no warning on the route when buying the tickets and ticket itself doesn't state TFW only, just “route: via Runcorn”. At Chester, we completely accidentally got a train going a different route. Our tickets were checked on the train and we were issued with a £100 penalty fare (each). This penalty is incorrectly issued as the reason stated is “00 No Ticket” when clearly in the grounds info section below, it states that we DID have a ticket, but were off route. National Rail Condition of Travel 13.2 states: “If you make a journey by a route that is not valid you will be liable to pay an excess fare. The price for this will be the difference between the amount paid for the Ticket you hold and the lowest price Ticket available for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel by that route.” Therefore we should have been charged an excess of 50 pence, not a penalty of £100. Please see attached tickets which were purchased in advance of travel.

Did you use the fare-dodger's lift? Otherwise, all the central Liverpool stations have gatelines so you'll have been checked to get inside those!

Of course at this point I had two valid tickets for the gates at Liverpool via different routes, but the gates were open both at Liverpool and Chester so literally no one looked at them. Go figure!

 

[Brissle Girl]

I would add, "In addition" before National Rail Conditions... etc, to make it clear that it's a separate point (and indeed, it's the primary point, as there should never have been a penalty fare, so maybe should go first).

Are you doing this twice for each penalty fare issued?

 

[HurdyGurdy]

The part about you making a mistake, not realising there were two different routes (actually more than two), etc seems to me at least superfluous and possibly detracts from the fundamental reason why you think the PF should not have been issued.

Your main point should be that even if a passenger is well aware there is more than one route and intentionally buys a ticket with route: 'Via Runcorn', NRCoT 13.2 entitles them to travel via Birkenhead and only be charged an excess fare, not a Penalty Fare.

 

[JohnJBC]

I would add, "In addition" before National Rail Conditions... etc, to make it clear that it's a separate point (and indeed, it's the primary point, as there should never have been a penalty fare, so maybe should go first).

Are you doing this twice for each penalty fare issued?

Yes, two appeals. I can do both myself as I can appeal on someone elses behalf, so was planning on them both being identical.
I will remove the bit about the mistake in choice of route and clarify the national rail guidelines and get the appeal off.

 

[WesternLancer]

Yes, two appeals. I can do both myself as I can appeal on someone elses behalf, so was planning on them both being identical.
I will remove the bit about the mistake in choice of route and clarify the national rail guidelines and get the appeal off.

Not sure what others think but I would let the railway / Appeal body do some of the work - eg don't say you got on x train by mistake but perhaps say you

"boarded the xx.xx hours train from Chester to Liverpool, but on board after showing my ticket, was issued with a Penalty Fare, which had paperwork stating that I had "no ticket" when I held the attached ticket. I believe that according to the National Conditions..the matter should have been dealt with through the payment of an Excess Fare to the value of £.... not through the issuing of a Penalty Fare.

The relevant clause of the National Conditions says: "....."

Furthermore the Penalty Fare paperwork does not seem to be correctly completed because I was in possession of a ticket.

I am therefore requesting that you uphold this Appeal"

This way, if they respond and state why the Penalty Fare was correct they will presumably have to state why if was correctly issued, if they get that wrong then it's easier for you to challenge it with help from this forum and the PF / ticketing experts here.

Happy for others to contradict me.

Unless you are up against the Appeal submission deadline I'd wait 24 hours before sending it so that other Forum members with expertise re this can have a look over your draft.

 

[jfollows]

Not sure what others think but I would let the railway / Appeal body do some of the work - eg don't say you got on x train by mistake but perhaps say you

"boarded the xx.xx hours train from Chester to Liverpool, but on board after showing your ticket, was issued with a Penalty Fare, which had paperwork stating that I had "no ticket" when I held the attached ticket. I believe that according to the National Conditions..the matter should have been dealt with through the payment of an Excess Fare to the value of £.... not through the issuing of a Penalty Fare.

The relevant clause of the National Conditions says: "....."

I am therefore requesting that you uphold this Appeal"

This way, if they respond and state why the Penalty Fare was correct they will presumably have to state why if was correctly issued, if they get that wrong then it's easier for you to challenge it with help from this forum and the PF / ticketing experts here.

Happy for others to contradict me.

Unless you are up against the Appeal submission deadline I'd wait 24 hours before sending it so that other Forum members with expertise re this can have a look over your draft.

For me, this version reads better.
Essentially, I think the original version is too long and contains too much unnecessary information - it's information which has informed us here so that's great, but as part of a formal appeal I don't feel it's necessary.
State the facts as above and put them to prove otherwise.

 

[Hadders]

I prefer @WesternLancer version. I would add a couple of things to it:

1. Add the exact Condition number 'I believe that under Condition 13.2 of the Natiional Rail Conditions of Travel the matter should have been dealt wiith through the payment of an Excess Fare'.

2. Mention in the reply that Merseyrail are bound by the National Rail Conditions of Travel. This should be obvious but there are times when they like to try and deny it applies to them!

 

[Fawkes Cat]

2. Mention in the reply that Merseyrail are bound by the National Rail Conditions of Travel. This should be obvious but there are times when they like to try and deny it applies to them!

To reinforce this, it might be worth pointing out that Appendix A of the National Rail Conditions of Travel specifically lists Merseyrail as a train company to which the conditions apply.

 

[furlong]

And specify the ground for your appeal directly - don't leave them to infer it.
16(3)(a) the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these
Regulations;

 

[AlbertBeale]

And specify the ground for your appeal directly - don't leave them to infer it.
16(3)(a) the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these
Regulations;

Yes - it wasn't correctly applied; but a penalty fare was irrelevant to the situation anyway, whether or not it was "properly" done. So two distinct grounds - and either is sufficient to have it dropped.

 

[furlong]

Yes - it wasn't correctly applied; but a penalty fare was irrelevant to the situation anyway, whether or not it was "properly" done. So two distinct grounds - and either is sufficient to have it dropped.

Once a Penalty Fare has been issued, that becomes the fare for the journey. An appeal can only be on one of the specified grounds. You either argue it wasn't issued in accordance with the regulations (because the regulations don't permit it to have been issued because the passenger produced a valid travel ticket, albeit one where the contract specified that a supplementary amount must be accepted and paid) or you have to argue compelling reasons. Anything else - such as arguing it can't be enforced and is invalid - lies outside the appeals process.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

the passenger produced a valid travel ticket, albeit one where the contract specified that a supplementary amount must be accepted and paid

Playing devil's advocate, that's one view of NRCoT. That the ticket was valid, but by making the journey via a non-valid route an excess was payable.

Another view might be that by making the journey on a non-valid route, the ticket was not valid unless and until the excess fare had been paid.

I'm not saying I agree with that view. It would be hard to see how the long standing custom and practice of paying an excess fare on board could co-exist with RoRA, if that was a correct understanding of the validity of a "wrong route", or "wrong time" ticket. Just that we have seen some odd lines of reasoning come out of the PF appeals process and I would not be very surprised if it says that where Penalty Fares apply, the regulations allow a collector to decide to charge either a PF or an excess.

 

[JohnJBC]

Okay an update on this. The appeal has been rejected. I will probably re-appeal on principle as much as anything else. The justification for rejection is below. The main point seems to be at the bottom, an invalid ticket is to be treated the same as no ticket.

Any thoughts? Thanks again everyone!

"The National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) advise that where the facility to buy a ticket exists prior to
boarding, passengers should pay the correct fare for their entire journey before they travel and produce for
inspection a valid ticket as evidence of their right to make a journey on the relevant train, otherwise they
may be liable to pay a Penalty Fare Notice.
I understand the ticket produced for inspection was not valid on the services of the relevant train operator.
Restrictions apply to the use of some tickets such as the dates, days and times of travel, and the trains in
which they can be used.
Train operators compete for business and may encourage passengers onto their services by offering fares
at a reduced price, however, restrictions will always apply. As the revenue from the sale of this type of
ticket is not shared with any other train company, where a "train company specific" ticket has been bought,
it will only be deemed valid for use on the services of the named operator.
Travel between Chester and Liverpool Lime Street via Runcorn is a route operated by Transport For Wales
only, Merseyrail don't offer this route.
As long as the ticket restrictions are observed, passengers can benefit from saving money on their
fare. However, using the ticket on any other operator's services may result in a penalty fare being
charged.
The terms and conditions of use and any restrictions associated with the ticket would have been made
clear at the point of sale. Unfortunately, it remains the passenger's responsibility to join the correct train and
use the right operator's services.
As the journey was not made with the correct train operator and there were no mitigating circumstances
(such as severe service disruptions) to take into consideration, I'm afraid it has been concluded by Penalty
Services that the Penalty Fare Notice should stand.
Where a passenger is deemed to have joined a train without a valid ticket they will be processed in the
same way as if they had joined with no ticket (as the ticket was invalidated for that journey)."
A passenger's right to a refund on any unused tickets is explained in the National Rail Conditions of Travel.
Having taken into consideration all the points raised to date, we regret to advise that your appeal has been
unsuccessful. It is your right to re-appeal this decision. Any further appeal will be considered by a different
appeal assessor. If re-appealing, please give the reason(s) why you are appealing against this decision and
also mention any additional circumstances you would like taken into account.

 

[AlterEgo]

An indescribably thick refusal of your appeal which typically fails to understand that a ticket with a geographic route is not at all treated as "no ticket" as you went to lengths to explain.

Please do re-appeal to these smooth brained imbeciles, using the same justification as before.

 

[furlong]

They've sent the wrong response - your ticket was not operator-specific so most of what they've written has no relevance to the situation!

Once again, it is imperative that you set out your appeal in a logical, legalistic way, covering all the bases. It is wrong to assume that the person dealing with it will understand very much about ticketing or penalty fares so you must do their work for them and not leave gaps of misunderstanding for them to fall into! Here is one example https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/stansted-airport-fines.253779/post-6421189 There is no word limit. If it doesn't fit into the box, just summarise it there and send the whole thing as an attachment.

You can also escalate this one through Transport Focus which is responsible for overseeing the process and ought to take action over an appeal where the assessor showed a lack of knowledge of basic ticketing.

 

[JohnJBC]

They've sent the wrong response - your ticket was not operator-specific so most of what they've written has no relevance to the situation!

Once again, it is imperative that you set out your appeal in a logical, legalistic way, covering all the bases. It is wrong to assume that the person dealing with it will understand very much about ticketing or penalty fares so you must do their work for them and not leave gaps of misunderstanding for them to fall into! Here is one example https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/stansted-airport-fines.253779/post-6421189 There is no word limit. If it doesn't fit into the box, just summarise it there and send the whole thing as an attachment.

You can also escalate this one through Transport Focus which is responsible for overseeing the process and ought to take action over an appeal where the assessor showed a lack of knowledge of basic ticketing.

Okay - so I am thinking something along the lines of the below for a re-appeal. Thoughts and opinions welcomed, do I need to start from the beginning again or will they read the previous information?

---
The reason for this reappeal is the justification supplied for the original rejection is incorrect and not relevant to this case. I am appealing on grounds 16(3)(a) the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these regulations.

The explanation given in the initial rejection suggests that I had no valid ticket for travel before boarding the train. This is not the case. I had a valid ticket for travel between Chester and Liverpool with no restriction on the train operator, only a geographic route. The national rail conditions of travel 13.2 states that “If you make a journey by a route that is not valid you will be liable to pay an excess fare. The price for this will be the difference between the amount paid for the Ticket you hold and the lowest price Ticket available for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel by that route”. Appendix A of the National Rail Conditions of Travel specifically lists Merseyrail as a train company to which the conditions apply. Therefore according to the regulations, I am entitled to travel on this ticket via Birkenhead with only an excess fare to be paid (of 50 pence). Therefore, the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of the regulations and I ask again that this appeal be upheld.

 

[185]

(irrelevant to this case but I believe Penalty Services Ltd has recently been sold by Simon Hopper ...with a Canadian & American now listed as owners, perhaps something is afoot)

A truly shocking, dismissive refusal where a clear breach of penalty fare regs has taken place. Customer has a right to pay an excess.

 

[furlong]

You are missing the bit about how the appeals body needs to handle your appeal. Don't "ask again"! They might refuse again! Explain why under the regulations you believe that they have no choice in the matter and MUST uphold your appeal (or else they might be pursued - prosecuted even - as individuals for knowingly acting outside the law). You can do this in a similar way that the example I linked to did it (by warning them to take and act upon legal advice for their own personal protection if they're thinking of rejecting the appeal). You're hoping that if they took legal advice it would match what you're telling them, that they have no discretion in the matter if they accept the facts in front of them and that they must uphold the appeal.

 

[Brissle Girl]

You are missing the bit about how the appeals body needs to handle your appeal. Don't "ask again"! They might refuse again! Explain why under the regulations you believe that they have no choice in the matter and MUST uphold your appeal (or else they might be pursued - prosecuted even - as individuals for knowingly acting outside the law). You can do this in a similar way that the example I linked to did it (by warning them to take and act upon legal advice for their own personal protection if they're thinking of rejecting the appeal). You're hoping that if they took legal advice it would match what you're telling them, that they have no discretion in the matter if they accept the facts in front of them and that they must uphold the appeal.

Isn’t that relevant for the final appeal? This is the second one as I understand it. Do the people reviewing this one have the same legal liability? I would assume they are employees of some body which would take any liability.

 

[island]

(or else they might be pursued - prosecuted even - as individuals for knowingly acting outside the law)

This is not going to happen, so putting it in an appeal letter is just going to come across as pompous, threatening, and full of oneself, and will not achieve the goal of having the appeal assessor on one's side.

Best to focus on the facts.

 

[JohnJBC]

Okay a slightly stronger worded version below - hopefully still on the side of being firm but polite?
---

The reason for this reappeal is the justification supplied for the original rejection is incorrect and not relevant to this case. The original assessor seems to have treated the case as if my ticket was restricted to TFW only. This is entirely incorrect. The appeals body has a responsibility to make judgements on matters of fact and according to the regulations, not to make arbitrary decisions.

The facts of the case are as follows: I had a valid ticket for travel between Chester and Liverpool with no restriction on the train operator, only a geographic route. The fact that I was off route does not invalidate my ticket as provision for this exact case exists in the regulations. The National Rail Conditions of Travel 13.2 states that “If you make a journey by a route that is not valid you will be liable to pay an excess fare. The price for this will be the difference between the amount paid for the Ticket you hold and the lowest price Ticket available for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel by that route”. Appendix A of the National Rail Conditions of Travel specifically lists Merseyrail as a train company to which the conditions apply. Therefore, I was entirely entitled to travel on this ticket via Birkenhead with only an excess fare to be paid (of 50 pence). I produced this ticket when requested to inspectors but was incorrectly issued a penalty fare instead of an excess. I am now appealing on grounds 16(3)(a) “the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these regulations”. The regulations in this case are clear, this appeal must be upheld.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Okay a slightly stronger worded version below - hopefully still on the side of being firm but polite?
---

The reason for this reappeal is the justification supplied for the original rejection is incorrect and not relevant to this case. The original assessor seems to have treated the case as if my ticket was restricted to TFW only. This is entirely incorrect. The appeals body has a responsibility to make judgements on matters of fact and according to the regulations, not to make arbitrary decisions.

The facts of the case are as follows: I had a valid ticket for travel between Chester and Liverpool with no restriction on the train operator, only a geographic route. The fact that I was off route does not invalidate my ticket as provision for this exact case exists in the regulations. The National Rail Conditions of Travel 13.2 states that “If you make a journey by a route that is not valid you will be liable to pay an excess fare. The price for this will be the difference between the amount paid for the Ticket you hold and the lowest price Ticket available for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel by that route”. Appendix A of the National Rail Conditions of Travel specifically lists Merseyrail as a train company to which the conditions apply. Therefore, I was entirely entitled to travel on this ticket via Birkenhead with only an excess fare to be paid (of 50 pence). I produced this ticket when requested to inspectors but was incorrectly issued a penalty fare instead of an excess. I am now appealing on grounds 16(3)(a) “the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these regulations”. The regulations in this case are clear, this appeal must be upheld.

Two comments:

1) Paragraph breaks. These will make it easier to read - and you want to make it easy for whoever handles the appeal to agree with you.

2) I have not read the whole thread through in detail just now so this point may already have been addressed, but you don't make it clear why being denied the chance to buy an excess breaches the penalty fare regulations. Was your penalty fare issued for a clearly stated reason? Alternatively or additionally do the penalty fare regulations list the reasons for issuing a penalty fare? Do these reasons exclude being off-route?

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting that the railway was right to issue the penalty fare. But I do think it is important to spell out every step of the reason why the railway was wrong to issue it: we have already seen at the first stage appeal that a wrongly issued penalty can be upheld.

 

[Brissle Girl]

It stated “ no ticket” which is clearly wrong, as the OP had a ticket, which actually covered him for the journey between the two stations - just on the wrong route.

 

[JohnJBC]

Two comments:

1) Paragraph breaks. These will make it easier to read - and you want to make it easy for whoever handles the appeal to agree with you.

2) I have not read the whole thread through in detail just now so this point may already have been addressed, but you don't make it clear why being denied the chance to buy an excess breaches the penalty fare regulations. Was your penalty fare issued for a clearly stated reason? Alternatively or additionally do the penalty fare regulations list the reasons for issuing a penalty fare? Do these reasons exclude being off-route?

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting that the railway was right to issue the penalty fare. But I do think it is important to spell out every step of the reason why the railway was wrong to issue it: we have already seen at the first stage appeal that a wrongly issued penalty can be upheld.

Thanks Fawkes, appreciate the feedback. Number 1 is easy - will do. No 2 I think I need to do some more work on. The reason stated on the penalty notice says "No ticket" where the reason underneath says "Ticket for TFW Chester - Liverpool via Runcorn". This is where there is potential confusion that I have tried to address. The penalty notice makes references to TFW, but the ticket does not, it only has a route restriction. My understanding (mostly from discussion here) is that if my ticket was explicitly TFW only, it would have been invalid, but as it only had a geographic route restriction I should have been only liable for an excess charge according to the regulations, not a penalty fare. I could potentially make this clearer by referencing the text on the penalty directly and pointing out the reference to TFW is wrong.

 

[Western Sunset]

Did Mersyrail ever actually read, let alone understand and digest, the first appeal?

 

[Haywain]

Did Mersyrail ever actually read, let alone understand and digest, the first appeal?

Appeals don't go to Merseyrail, do they?

 

[JohnJBC]

Final draft below: Any last minute feedback appreciated. I will submit this tomorrow.
-----

The reason for this reappeal is the justification supplied for the original rejection is incorrect, seems to be based on misapprehension and is simply not relevant to this case. The original assessor seems to have treated the case as if my ticket was restricted to TFW only. While this has been listed on the penalty notice this is entirely incorrect. If you look at my ticket that I supplied as evidence, there is no restriction to TFW services only. The appeals body has a responsibility to make judgements on matters of fact and according to the regulations, not to make arbitrary decisions.

The facts of the case are as follows: I had a valid ticket for travel between Chester and Liverpool with no restriction on the train operator, only a geographic route. The fact that I was off route does not invalidate my ticket as provision for this exact case exists in the regulations. The National Rail Conditions of Travel 13.2 states that “If you make a journey by a route that is not valid you will be liable to pay an excess fare. The price for this will be the difference between the amount paid for the Ticket you hold and the lowest price Ticket available for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel by that route”. Appendix A of the National Rail Conditions of Travel specifically lists Merseyrail as a train company to which the conditions apply. Therefore, I was entirely entitled to travel on this ticket via Birkenhead with only an excess fare to be paid (of 50 pence). I produced this ticket when requested to inspectors but was denied the opportunity to pay an excess fare as stipulated in the regulations and incorrectly issued a penalty fare in violation of the National Rail Conditions of Travel 13.2. I am now appealing on grounds 16(3)(a) “the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these regulations”. The regulations in this case are clear, this appeal must be upheld.

 

[Brissle Girl]

In previous cases where it's gone to a third appeal, others have advised that you shouldn't assume that the previous correspondence is available or read, so you need to set things out from the beginning very clearly. So I'm not sure that your opening para is needed.

However, your last sentence may need to be expanded into a separate paragraph, and cover the legal liability of those assessing the appeal, and thus the importance of them taking advice as there could be consequences to them if they do not base their decision on the facts of the case.

 

[30907]

If I were the appeals person, the last sentence of para 1 would wind me up, so I would delete it - you can cover the point at the end as Brissle Girl suggests.

The rest is OK (though perhaps you don't need to tell them that NRCoT apply to Mersyrail?).