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.