• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Taken to court, facing criminal charges advice needed

Status
Not open for further replies.

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
I can't believe Crosscountry would proceed if they received a well worded letter pointing out the relevant terms and conditions of railway travel that they appear to have missed!

If this was another TOC such as GWR then I might agree with you, but XC?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
A Manchester to Andover ticket routed +via London is valid on all permitted routes to/from London, as follows:
  • between Manchester and London; this includes Manchester - Birmingham - Oxford - Reading - London Paddington [note: AM time restrictions apply]
  • between London and Andover; this includes London Paddington - Reading - Basingstoke - Andover [no time restrictions apply due to Network Area Rule]
man-andover-png.39394


It is permissible to avoid the double-back between Reading & London Paddington afforded by the validity described above, for example by remaining on a CrossCountry train at Reading.

Additionally, a Manchester to Andover ticket routed +via London is valid on all permitted routes between Manchester & Andover that avoid London, as the fare paid is higher than the appropriate Manchester to Andover ticket routed Not via London. The Guard can either accept the ticket as it is a higher fare, or if they wish, they can issue a change of route excess fare for a value of £0.

Unfortunately XC do employ some staff who are very unknowledgeable; their prosecutions department behaves in a disgraceful way at times. I've seen this sort of behaviour before (including prosecuting someone for not doubling-back to London). They are bullies, they are cowards, and they are very very wrong.

There are three possible ways to resolve this:
  1. I have a robust discussion with XC on your behalf
  2. I ask a contact I have at XC to resolve it
  3. We appoint a solicitor to represent you in court; if what you say is true, you will win the case.
If I can find a suitable solicitor, I will suggest we go for option 3.

If not, I am prepared to go down the routes of options 1 or 2, but I am unhappy that this gets XC off the hook. I'd like to see them defeated in court.

I do hate calling TOCs when I know I am right and they are wrong; they try to argue with me and tell me I am wrong, and it is a most frustrating experience. I've recently done battle with several and I find it very draining. Some of them behave in a despicable manner. I don't want any money for it but it irks me that I spend so much time dealing with rogue TOCs for no reward and it is not good for my health. Sadly Transport Focus do not appear to be capable or willing to do anything about the poor way in which passengers are sometimes treated.

Feel free to send me a message (via 'conversation') with your mobile number and I will call you tomorrow morning if you like.
 

Attachments

  • man-andover.png
    man-andover.png
    67.6 KB · Views: 788
Last edited:

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
A Manchester to Andover ticket routed +via London is valid on all permitted routes:
  • between Manchester and London; this includes Manchester - Birmingham - Oxford - Reading - London Paddington [note: AM time restrictions apply]
  • between London and Andover; this includes London Paddington - Reading - Basingstoke - Andover [no time restrictions apply due to Network Area Rule]
man-andover-png.39394


It is permissible to avoid the double-back between Reading & London Paddington afforded by the validity described above, for example by remaining on a CrossCountry train at Reading.

Additionally, a Manchester to Andover ticket routed +via London is valid on all permitted routes between Manchester & Andover that avoid London, as the fare paid is higher than the appropriate Manchester to Andover ticket routed Not via London. The Guard can either accept the ticket as it is a higher fare, or if they wish, they can issue a change of route excess fare for a value of £0.

Unfortunately XC do employ some staff who are very unknowledgeable; their prosecutions department behaves in a disgraceful way at times. I've seen this sort of behaviour before (including prosecuting someone for not doubling-back to London). They are bullies, they are cowards, and they are very very wrong.

There are three possible ways to resolve this:
  1. I have a robust discussion with XC on your behalf
  2. I ask a contact I have at XC to resolve it
  3. We appoint a solicitor to represent you in court; if what you say is true, you will win the case.
If I can find a suitable solicitor, I will suggest we go for option 3.

If not, I am prepared to go down the routes of options 1 or 2, but I am unhappy that this gets XC off the hook. I'd like to see them defeated in court.

I do hate calling TOCs when I know I am right and they are wrong; they try to argue with me and tell me I am wrong, and it is a most frustrating experience. I've recently done battle with several and I find it very draining. Some of them behave in a despicable manner. I don't want any money for it but it irks me that I spend so much time dealing with rogue TOCs for no reward and it is not good for my health. Sadly Anthony Smith, CEO of Transport Focus - who is paid a huge amount of money to supposedly represent our interests (yeah, we wish!) - doesn't seem to give a damn, but that's for another thread.

Feel free to send me a message (via 'conversation') with your mobile number and I will call you tomorrow morning if you like.

Morning Yorkie - taking the OP's account at face value and providing the evidence she supplies back this up I'm in agreement with you. PF has been a toothless farce since the Rail Passengers Council was destroyed - deliberately designed to be by New Labour to quell dissent.

This case is the sort of thing an Independent Passenger Ombudsman should deal with but despite promises do we have one?
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
We have re-published this thread as the case is now closed. However I am not happy at the outcome; the accused has been treated disgracefully and is substantially out of pocket.

The accused spent a considerable sum preparing a defence, however Transport Investigations have withdrawn the case after a preliminary hearing and XC are apparently not even being pursued for breaching contract law and consumer law, which I find very disappointing.

I had arranged a zero cost option which would have resulted in XC being required to pay compensation, but this offer was not taken up.

A ticket routed "+via London" is valid by all permitted routes from origin to London, plus all permitted routes from London to destination. If a permitted route involves a double-back (e.g. Manchester to Watford Jn route: +via London could involve a double-back into & out of Euston if the passenger wishes) the passenger is not required to actually double-back.

A ticket routed "+via London" can be excessed into a "Not via London" fare (but this should only happen if the ticket is not already valid as described in the previous paragraph) and this costs HALF the difference, with the excess being to the APPROPRIATE fare with any applicable Railcard discount. If the excess is zero, then a zero fare coupon should be issued, or the passenger can simply be told not to worry about it.

It is not appropriate for XC Guards to do any action other than charge an excess fare (in accordance with the rules, so you're generally talking pennies!) or simply accept the ticket. They should not be asking people to buy a new ticket nor should they be reporting people for prosecution.
 
Last edited:

MichaelAMW

Member
Joined
18 Jun 2010
Messages
1,011
Is that really it? XC talk complete rubbish and attempt to wrongly prosecute someone, but they end up out of pocket and XC get away with it? Is there really no come back for our OP?
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
Re the following points:

The accused spent a considerable sum preparing a defence ...


... I had arranged a zero cost option which would have resulted in XC being required to pay compensation, but this offer was not taken up.

Obviously I do not expect yorkie to provide more details as I am guessing the OP does not want them published but, in my view, this should be highlighted in case others in similar positions read this thread.

In cases where a ticket is, without doubt, 100% valid there really should be no need for anyone to spend any sum (never mind a "considerable" one) to prepare a defence when forum members such as yorkie are able and willing to assist.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
Is that really it? XC talk complete rubbish and attempt to wrongly prosecute someone, but they end up out of pocket and XC get away with it?
Yes
Is there really no come back for our OP?
Only if they request a solicitor to pursue the matter with XC. My understanding is that isn't happening.

In cases where a ticket is, without doubt, 100% valid there really should be no need for anyone to spend any sum (never mind a "considerable" one) to prepare a defence when forum members such as yorkie are able and willing to assist.
I'd arranged for a suitable solicitor (a member of this forum) to take the case on, and I'd arranged for people in relevant roles providing fares data to the rail industry to agree to be called as witnesses in court if required.

XC don't always get away with this behaviour; they had a spectacular defeat a few years ago regarding a ticket dispute in the Midlands area, however the victims are not ready to go public yet. Maybe in a couple of years or so.
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
If this happened to me, I would be looking at all options, regardless of whether or not they actually too me (significantly) out of pocket.

Private prosecution of XC and/or all responsible parties for any breaches of any laws (DPA, consumer etc.), County Court claim, judicial review etc.

It is totally unacceptable that something like this be permitted to happen with no comeback and it strikes me as the kind of thing that ought to see XC stripped of the franchise and/or have a penalty imposed by DfT (haha, as if), as well as custodial sentences for those responsible.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
It is totally unacceptable that something like this be permitted to happen with no comeback and it strikes me as the kind of thing that ought to see XC stripped of the franchise and/or have a penalty imposed by DfT (haha, as if), as well as custodial sentences for those responsible.
Nothing like blowing things out of proportion.
 

dgl

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2014
Messages
2,390
Looking at what has happened would any newspapers be interested in the story?, if any are maybe a quick heads up to XC might produce suitable remuneration. Or maybe you may get suitable remuneration from selling the story.
Train operating companies should be made to pay similar to when they prosecute for failure pay.

Plus if it did get in the papers, if this has happened to anyone else they know they are in the right and know to challenge it.
 

MarlowDonkey

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2013
Messages
1,094
XC don't always get away with this behaviour; they had a spectacular defeat a few years ago regarding a ticket dispute in the Midlands area

There was a case on the forum where someone was travelling from somewhere in the North to High Wycombe on a via London ticket, where XC had refused to accept that the ticket was valid via Banbury.
 

Llanigraham

Established Member
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,073
Location
Powys
If this happened to me, I would be looking at all options, regardless of whether or not they actually too me (significantly) out of pocket.

Private prosecution of XC and/or all responsible parties for any breaches of any laws (DPA, consumer etc.), County Court claim, judicial review etc.

It is totally unacceptable that something like this be permitted to happen with no comeback and it strikes me as the kind of thing that ought to see XC stripped of the franchise and/or have a penalty imposed by DfT (haha, as if), as well as custodial sentences for those responsible.

You would require extremely deep pockets then! Do you realise just how expensive those things would be?
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
It would be possible to get compensation from XC; as mentioned above, I am aware of people who have achieved this.

It's not a level playing field and there will be an initial cost in pursuing train companies who have breached the terms of the contract, which many people will not want to bear.

But ForTheLoveOf is right to point out that there should be appropriately harsh penalties for rouge train companies. If there was, it would be a much fairer system and you would be less likely to see passengers mistreated.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
But ForTheLoveOf is right to point out that there should be appropriately harsh penalties for rouge train companies.
Oh, that goes without saying. But calling for custodial sentences is just a little bit OTT.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
Looking at what has happened would any newspapers be interested in the story?
Yes. If the OP were prepared to tell their story too their local paper I'm sure it would get some coverage.
 

broadgage

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2012
Messages
1,094
Location
Somerset
Oh, that goes without saying. But calling for custodial sentences is just a little bit OTT.
A bit OTT for the first offence, I agree, but perhaps justified for repeat offences ? After all, passengers who travel without a valid ticket are not normally imprisoned for a single offence, but can be for repeated fraud.
The behaviour of Virgin certainly sounds appalling, and I feel that they should pay substantial costs.

EDIT TO ADD that it is cross country who are at fault, no longer virgin cross country.
 
Last edited:

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
You would require extremely deep pockets then! Do you realise just how expensive those things would be?
Yep, for me this is such an important cause that I would be willing to make significant sacrifices to get the 'justice' deserved. Justice is one of the key principles I live by - it's one thing having to abide by unfair rules, it's another when the people who set and enforce these unfair rules then change the rules mid-way through, or completely ignore them.
 

221129

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
6,520
Location
Sunny Scotland
Yep, for me this is such an important cause that I would be willing to make significant sacrifices to get the 'justice' deserved. Justice is one of the key principles I live by - it's one thing having to abide by unfair rules, it's another when the people who set and enforce these unfair rules then change the rules mid-way through, or completely ignore them.
Yeah sure, bankrupt yourself for a large multinational company to pay pocket change as a fine... Sure you would...
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
Yep, for me this is such an important cause that I would be willing to make significant sacrifices to get the 'justice' deserved.
You do realise that we're talking second-mortgage amounts of money, right?
 
Last edited:

Abpj17

Member
Joined
5 Jul 2014
Messages
1,007
Looking at what has happened would any newspapers be interested in the story?, if any are maybe a quick heads up to XC might produce suitable remuneration. Or maybe you may get suitable remuneration from selling the story.
Train operating companies should be made to pay similar to when they prosecute for failure pay.

Plus if it did get in the papers, if this has happened to anyone else they know they are in the right and know to challenge it.

The Daily Mail would probably be.... (sorry, couldn't resist ;)
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
It is well-known that many of the general public think CrossCountry is run by Virgin (as it once was) instead of Arriva (as it is now).
There's a certain irony in someone saying that a company's behaviour is inexcusable due to sloppy prosecutions and managing to name the wrong company in the process!

(Given that it's only a mere 10 years since Virgin ran the CrossCountry franchise.)
 

wbm00

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2012
Messages
29
Isn't it possible to file a small claim against XC? Damages limited to £10,000 do not carry the risk of costs awards unless brought unreasonably (and my limited experience suggests that there's a high threshold for a DJ to consider a party unreasonable).

I have very limited experience the UK rail industry and its processes and I'm aware there may be special laws to protect the TOCs, but would be interested to know why a small claim wouldn't be an option here.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
I have very limited experience the UK rail industry and its processes and I'm aware there may be special laws to protect the TOCs, but would be interested to know why a small claim wouldn't be an option here.
It would be an option, but the problem is that the losses aren't a direct consequence of XC's action since the OP had a choice about how much money they were willing to spend preparing a defence. Even if a judge agrees that XC/TIL's initial threat of prosecution wasn't justified they may still not award costs.
 

broadgage

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2012
Messages
1,094
Location
Somerset
It is well-known that many of the general public think CrossCountry is run by Virgin (as it once was) instead of Arriva (as it is now).

Indeed, I have now edited my post to reflect the fact that cross country is now NOT run by virgin. Sorry about that error.
 

Llanigraham

Established Member
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,073
Location
Powys
Yep, for me this is such an important cause that I would be willing to make significant sacrifices to get the 'justice' deserved. Justice is one of the key principles I live by - it's one thing having to abide by unfair rules, it's another when the people who set and enforce these unfair rules then change the rules mid-way through, or completely ignore them.

No you wouldn't, because you would end up bankrupt within weeks, if not days.
You obviously have no idea how much this would cost.
 

SHD

Member
Joined
18 Jul 2012
Messages
456
Call them out on Twitter.
"You took me to court while I had a perfectly valid ticket, withdrew the prosecution when your incompetence was exposed, and now refuse to cover my losses. Is that how you treat a hardworking, honest fare-paying passenger?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top