• 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!

Appealed for ticket fine denied even thought wrong ££ amount charged

Status
Not open for further replies.

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
What I find most remarkable about the response to the second-level appeal is that it doesn't include a single reference to the regulations against which it was supposed to have been judged! It ought to have explained its reasoning by quoting specific parts of the regulations, instead of leaving you to guess the method it used.

But third-level appeals are decided by a subset of the people listed here - https://www.appealservice.co.uk/IndependentAppealsPanel - and their biographies show careers dealing with legal matters and complaints resolution outside the railways - so we should hope that they will either accept the argument presented, or alternatively provide legally-robust reasoning for its rejection.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,098
So you admit you travelled with no ticket but by hook or crook you are going to do everything that you possibly can to get out of paying what you know you should rightfully have to pay because you were in the wrong.

Never mind all the faff above and all the inevitable 'Oh but the TOCs dont do this that or the other' this, as you all know is morally wrong and the fact that people are assisting is not looking good for the forum nor their members who are happy to do so.

I sorry but personally could not disagree more
The TOC have told a blatant porkie by claiming that they have acted in accordance with the rules
The TOC have tremendous power by being able to prosecute people on a strict liability basis and need to be taken to task if they abuse this power which they are by telling lies and in my view liars do not deserve to be paid any extra.
( they have not lost out as the OP had paid for the journey but was not able to produce the ticket)
I am pleased that there are people on the forum who clearly agree.
It is amusing that you think it is OK for the TOC to make a mistake but if the OP makes a mistake he has to pay 3 times the cost of the journey.
Where is the Morality in this?
 
Last edited:

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
I sorry but personally could not disagree more
The TOC have told a blatant porkie by claiming that they have acted in accordance with the rules
The TOC have tremendous power by being able to prosecute people on a strict liability basis and need to be taken to task if they abuse this power which they are by telling lies and in my view liars do not deserve to be paid any extra.
( they have not lost out as the OP had paid for the journey but was not able to produce the ticket)
I am pleased that there are people on the forum who clearly agree.


Im sure you are pleased that others are finding a small fault here to enable the OP to get off paying the railway what it is owed.

It is amusing that you think it is OK for the TOC to make a mistake but if the OP makes a mistake he has to pay 3 times the cost of the journey.
Where is the Morality in this?

Nice edit - I think you will find that I didnt say it was OK for the TOC to make a mistake on the form at all - unless ive missed it since you edited to add this bit - however the rules of travelling without a ticket are quite clear are they not? Do you think that rules should not be there because someone has allegedly made a mistake? So lets get rid of them yes? This is basically what you are saying here so lets do that then.

Free train rides for everyone!!
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
2,650
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious here or its already been said (I couldn't see any mention of it) - why not retrieve the copy of your un-used return from your finance department and send it to them as proof of purchase, along with a copy of the transaction on your bank statement, apologetically explaining the circumstances?

At this point they will probably say no, but that's what I would have done in your place rather than trying to get them on a technicality and potentially getting their backs up.
 

221129

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
6,520
Location
Sunny Scotland
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious here or its already been said (I couldn't see any mention of it) - why not retrieve the copy of your un-used return from your finance department and send it to them as proof of purchase, along with a copy of the transaction on your bank statement, apologetically explaining the circumstances?

At this point they will probably say no, but that's what I would have done in your place rather than trying to get them on a technicality and potentially getting their backs up.
Because why appeal to goodwill when you have valid grounds to appeal?
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious here or its already been said (I couldn't see any mention of it) - why not retrieve the copy of your un-used return from your finance department and send it to them as proof of purchase, along with a copy of the transaction on your bank statement, apologetically explaining the circumstances?

At this point they will probably say no, but that's what I would have done in your place rather than trying to get them on a technicality and potentially getting their backs up.
Because the issuance of the Penalty Fare is not predicated on having paid, or not paid, the relevant fare. It is about producing a valid ticket. The OP was unable to do so at the time, and accordingly GA will have no interest whatsoever in seeing the ticket now.

And as @221129 says, it is not a mere technicality for a Penalty Fare to be issued for the wrong amount. Train companies should make it very, very easy for their staff to get it right. If they don't, then they have no-one else to blame. Getting their backs up is, again, irrelevant, since they are now barred from prosecuting and therefore there is little which they can do even if the Penalty Fare goes entirely unpaid.
 

221129

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
6,520
Location
Sunny Scotland
Im sure you are pleased that others are finding a small fault here to enable the OP to get off paying the railway what it is owed.
The Railway isn't owed anything, that is the point. It's extremely rare that I will defend someone who was in the wrong, but in this case, the PF is invalid, and the OP had actually paid their fare.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,098
Im sure you are pleased that others are finding a small fault here to enable the OP to get off paying the railway what it is owed.



Nice edit - I think you will find that I didnt say it was OK for the TOC to make a mistake on the form at all - unless ive missed it since you edited to add this bit - however the rules of travelling without a ticket are quite clear are they not? Do you think that rules should not be there because someone has allegedly made a mistake? So lets get rid of them yes? This is basically what you are saying here so lets do that then.

The rules should of course stay but point you are missing is that GA did not abide by the rules.

Free train rides for everyone!!

Except the OP who paid for their journey and because of the failure of GA to abide by the rules invokes the rule that states that the OP does not owe anything more for that journey.

I wonder if it has occurred to you that both parliament and the author of the rule allowing appeal intended it to be there to prevent TOCs from collecting PFs if they issue for the the wrong amount.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
Im sure you are pleased that others are finding a small fault here to enable the OP to get off paying the railway what it is owed.
It's the same kind of 'small fault' as the OP's mistake! The difference being that the OP did not deprive the TOC of any money through what they did, and were more than happy to provide their ticket after the fact - whilst the TOC were more than happy to make the OP pay their fare three times over.

Nice edit - I think you will find that I didnt say it was OK for the TOC to make a mistake on the form at all - unless ive missed it since you edited to add this bit - however the rules of travelling without a ticket are quite clear are they not?
The rules are clear for passengers and TOCs. If both the passenger and the TOC break the rules I think it is perfectly fair for it to be written off with no further action from either side.

Do you think that rules should not be there because someone has allegedly made a mistake?
I think that Penalty Fares are generally speaking not an effective scheme to deter fare evasion, because of a variety of issues, but whether or not they should exist at all is an entirely different question.

So lets get rid of them yes? This is basically what you are saying here so lets do that then.

Free train rides for everyone!!
It's only a free ride for as long as the TOC decides to settle the incident by means of a flawed Penalty Fare. They could equally as well simply have sold the OP another ticket and then the OP would have been unable to recover anything. That they didn't do that is entirely their choice and their mistake.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,153
Location
West of Andover
Because the issuance of the Penalty Fare is not predicated on having paid, or not paid, the relevant fare. It is about producing a valid ticket. The OP was unable to do so at the time, and accordingly GA will have no interest whatsoever in seeing the ticket now.

And as @221129 says, it is not a mere technicality for a Penalty Fare to be issued for the wrong amount. Train companies should make it very, very easy for their staff to get it right. If they don't, then they have no-one else to blame. Getting their backs up is, again, irrelevant, since they are now barred from prosecuting and therefore there is little which they can do even if the Penalty Fare goes entirely unpaid.

Other than taking the OP to the county court to recover the amount outstanding...
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
Other than taking the OP to the county court to recover the amount outstanding...
Which Revenue Protection departments are not in the business of conducting, but even if they were, it would be defendable on exactly the same grounds as the appeals here and now.
 

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
So you admit you travelled with no ticket but by hook or crook you are going to do everything that you possibly can to get out of paying what you know you should rightfully have to pay because you were in the wrong.

Never mind all the faff above and all the inevitable 'Oh but the TOCs dont do this that or the other' this, as you all know is morally wrong and the fact that people are assisting is not looking good for the forum nor their members who are happy to do so.


Thanks for the reply. Its not about the fine now, its the principle. I use this route a few times a month and have never ever not purchased a ticket. I am not a serial offender. AS I have also stated an honest mistake was made which I quoted Jo Johnson above.

The rules are rules, I admit I didnt have a valid ticket with me, yet I bought a ticket, no loss of income for the train company, yet they didnt act within the rules when issuing the fine.

In this case they have over charged me then why should I pay? They broken their regulations. How many other times has this happened? Is is not considered fraud?

On another note I have also emailed the Minister of Transport and my local MP.
 

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious here or its already been said (I couldn't see any mention of it) - why not retrieve the copy of your un-used return from your finance department and send it to them as proof of purchase, along with a copy of the transaction on your bank statement, apologetically explaining the circumstances?

At this point they will probably say no, but that's what I would have done in your place rather than trying to get them on a technicality and potentially getting their backs up.

1st Appeal was on these grounds of honest mistake
2nd Appeal was on the grounds of over charged for the fine
Both denied.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,864
Location
Airedale
Rail Minister Jo Johnson said:
Rail users should make every effort to get the right ticket for their journey, but if you make an honest mistake, you should feel confident that the appeals system will recognise this and treat you fairly.
I am not surprised that your first appeal was rejected - having (on your person) no ticket at all is a byelaw offence, having the wrong sort of ticket for your journey is an "honest mistake".
Your second appeal was IMO valid, as there was a mistake in the paperwork and TOCs are not allowed to make honest mistakes. I trust the independent appeal panel will allow it and you will have saved yourself £42.80.
 
Last edited:

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
I thought you said your first appeal was successful?

Nope both denied

I am not surprised that your first appeal was rejected - having (on your person) no ticket at all is a byelaw offence, having the wrong sort of ticket for your journey is an "honest mistake".
Your second appeal was IMO valid, as there was a mistake in the paperwork and TOCs are not allowed to make honest mistakes. I trust the independent appeal panel will allow it and you will have saved yourself £42.80.

I had the 1st leg out, and the receipt on me and also whilst I was being issued I got a picture of the return leg sent to me.

Also is there a definition of "honest mistake"?
 
Last edited:

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,864
Location
Airedale
is there a definition of "honest mistake"?

Rail users should make every effort to get the right ticket for their journey, but if you make an honest mistake,

The context clearly suggests that getting an incorrect ticket might qualify - for example, buying an offpeak ticket and using it when it is barred. And in that circumstance a PF is not chargeable. However, the appeal panel might be more generous.

BTW the words of a Minister do not form part of the regulations.
 

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
Also is there a definition of "honest mistake"?

Some people on this forum persist in using it, but as you realise, it can cover anything (including deliberately dishonest behaviour subsequently regretted) and should be completely avoided.
A term that does get official use is "honest passengers".

The defunct SRA, which used to regulate PFs before that role was handed to the DfT (which since deleted most of the guidance), said:
A penalty fares scheme reverses the normal ‘burden of proof ’ which would apply if a person was prosecuted for not paying their fare.
...
For this reason, we [SRA, 2002] see our main role as making sure that the interests of honest passengers are protected

And here are some quotes from one of the Parliamentary debates for the original bill:

There have been arguments that the penalty fare will make criminals of honest passengers. This is just not so.

The innocent are protected by the Bill, but it is only fair that the dishonest traveller should be caught. However, even when he is caught he is not a criminal

One of the social benefits of this Bill is that it will take most ticketless travel outside the scope of the criminal law and will free the hard-pressed magistrates' courts to deal with other serious business.

If, however, a passenger on a train is not in possession of a ticket, he is not to be treated as a criminal under this Bill. He is simply asked to pay a penalty fare, which is a civil penalty and not a criminal one. If there are good reasons why he has not been able to obtain a ticket before travelling, not even this civil penalty will be due. Only if there is evidence of an intent to avoid payment may the passenger be liable to prosecution.
 

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
Quick question

Schedule 2 Appeal Procedure states

6. Where an Appeal Panel receives an appeal under regulation 16 or 17, it must decide whether to allow or not allow the appeal before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appeal is received.

Does that mean they must decide within 21 days of receiving appeal?

01/04/2019 Account was created on Appeal Service website
01/04/2019 Appeal has been logged
01/04/2019 Awaiting notice from transport provider
01/04/2019 Your appeal is awaiting assessment. Due to high volumes of appeals, your response may be delayed, however your case is currently on hold, and a response will be issued as soon as possible.
04/05/2019 Your appeal has been assessed and a response has been sent to your nominated email account, or by post where email was not possible
06/05/2019 Penalty Fare was confirmed on our system
06/05/2019 Further correspondence received
07/05/2019 Your appeal is awaiting assessment. Due to high volumes of appeals, your response may be delayed, however your case is currently on hold, and a response will be issued as soon as possible.
20/05/2019 Your appeal has been assessed and a response has been sent to your nominated email account, or by post where email was not possible.

Thats more than 21 days
 

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
That could be another failing of their system, then. If they don't respond within the time limit then that brings the matter to a close and their system should have automatically written it off.

(11) Where the relevant Appeal Panel—
(a) notifies the operator that an appeal has been allowed; or
(b) fails to adhere to the time period specified in paragraph 6 of Schedule 2, the appellant is not liable to pay the penalty fare in question.
....
6. Where an Appeal Panel receives an appeal under regulation 16 or 17, it must decide whether to allow or not allow the appeal before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appeal is received.
 

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
Also not picking issues with this process, 1st appeal letter states

IMPORTANT: Please note that failure to pay or further appeal within this stated time may result in Greater Anglia
taking further action to recover the outstanding debt.


As per regulations 8(d)

Next letter

Payment, or further appeal, must be received within 14 days of the date of this letter. Full payment options including, what will happen if you do not pay, are detailed in this response.

No payment options included, nothing about what will happen if I dont pay as per regulation

12. Where an Appeal Panel notifies its decision not to allow an appeal under regulation 17 it must provide the appellant with a statement that—

(a)the person has the right to appeal against the decision to the relevant Final Appeal Panel; and

(b)the operator will be entitled to commence court proceedings to recover the penalty fare if the appellant does not—

(i)appeal the decision to the relevant Final Appeal Panel within the 14 day period provided for by regulation 18(1)(a); or

(ii)pay the penalty fare within that period

So even if I decided to pay after 2nd appeal I have no idea to pay now.
 

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
So you could point out all these things to them and help them to get it right in future for other people. (Consultancy fee?)
 

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
That could be another failing of their system, then. If they don't respond within the time limit then that brings the matter to a close and their system should have automatically written it off.

I received a letter in between

Date: 15 April 2019

Dear
Re: Penalty Fare Notice
Thank you for your correspondence concerning the issue of the above referenced Penalty Fare.
This case is currently on hold and is awaiting full assessment. We are currently experiencing a high level of
appeals and apologise for the delay. We are committed to ensuring your appeal is fully investigated and, on
occasion, this can take extra time to investigate.
All communication received within AS is dealt with in order of date received, a full response will be issued as soon
as possible. If you have not received a response within 3 weeks of the date of this letter please contact us at the
address above, or through the website www.appealservice.co.uk.

2 weeks into their 3 week time frame.
 

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
The process they work under says they send that letter if it's going to take too long, but crucially the regulations don't appear to allow them to do that. You've no incentive to help them fix their processes.
Maybe still put in the 3rd appeal as already suggested, but perhaps with a cover note or a supplementary paragraph pointing out that even if this appeal is rejected, you don't believe you have any further liability because the last appeal timed out.
 

king100011

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
23
My 3rd appeal. Please check if ok

The Appeals Body has previously accepted that the Penalty Fare was issued for an incorrect amount, as it was not issued for the amount which Regulation 9(1) of The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 prescribes.


This is to say that it is satisfied that a ground for appeal under Regulation 16(3)(a) applies - being that the Penalty Fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.


Accordingly, the Appeal Panel is required, by Regulation 18(4) of the Regulations, to allow this third stage appeal (and was also under an obligation to allow the second stage appeal). It is not within the remit of the Appeal Panel to vary the Penalty Fare after it has been issued; Regulation 18(4) is explicitly clear that:


"If the relevant Final Appeal Panel, after considering an appeal under this regulation, concludes that any ground specified in regulation 16(3) applies, it must, subject to paragraph (7), allow the appeal."


I await your appeal response confirming that my appeal has been upheld.


Should my appeal be rejected for the 3rd time according to the The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018, Schedule 2 Appeal Procedure 6 - Where an Appeal Panel receives an appeal under regulation 16 or 17, it must decide whether to allow or not allow the appeal before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appeal is received. The appeal was received 01/04/2019 yet the response was received on the 04/05/2019, well outside the 21 days allowed. There is no regulation set for a letter in between these dates stating that you have “high level of appeals” or that my appeal “needs to be fully investigated”.


With this in mind I don’t believe that I have further liability as my initial appeal went over the regulated time period.
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
My 3rd appeal. Please check if ok

The Appeals Body has previously accepted that the Penalty Fare was issued for an incorrect amount, as it was not issued for the amount which Regulation 9(1) of The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 prescribes.


This is to say that it is satisfied that a ground for appeal under Regulation 16(3)(a) applies - being that the Penalty Fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.


Accordingly, the Appeal Panel is required, by Regulation 18(4) of the Regulations, to allow this third stage appeal (and was also under an obligation to allow the second stage appeal). It is not within the remit of the Appeal Panel to vary the Penalty Fare after it has been issued; Regulation 18(4) is explicitly clear that:


"If the relevant Final Appeal Panel, after considering an appeal under this regulation, concludes that any ground specified in regulation 16(3) applies, it must, subject to paragraph (7), allow the appeal."


I await your appeal response confirming that my appeal has been upheld.


Should my appeal be rejected for the 3rd time according to the The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018, Schedule 2 Appeal Procedure 6 - Where an Appeal Panel receives an appeal under regulation 16 or 17, it must decide whether to allow or not allow the appeal before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appeal is received. The appeal was received 01/04/2019 yet the response was received on the 04/05/2019, well outside the 21 days allowed. There is no regulation set for a letter in between these dates stating that you have “high level of appeals” or that my appeal “needs to be fully investigated”.


With this in mind I don’t believe that I have further liability as my initial appeal went over the regulated time period.
Hmm, I think the issue here is that this is currently drafted as almost two appeals stuck into one. I also think it is important to be assertive in that you are sure you have no further liability; anything less is not exactly going to convince them. How about this:
Dear Sir / Madam,

I am hereby submitting an third stage appeal under Regulation 18 of The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 against Penalty Fare no. XXXXXXX on the following two grounds.

(1) The Appeals Panel has previously accepted, in response to my second stage appeal under Regulation 17, that the Penalty Fare was issued for an incorrect amount, as it was not issued for the amount which Regulation 9(1) prescribes.

This means that the Appeals Panel was satisfied that a ground for appeal under Regulation 16(3)(a) applied - being that the Penalty Fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.

The Appeals Panel was not permitted to attempt to vary the Penalty Fare after it had been issued, and neither is it within the remit of the Final Appeal Panel to do so; Regulation 18(4), analogous to Regulation 17(4) for the second stage appeal, is explicitly clear that:

"If the relevant Final Appeal Panel, after considering an appeal under this regulation, concludes that any ground specified in regulation 16(3) applies, it must, subject to paragraph (7), allow the appeal."

Accordingly, I am not liable to pay the Penalty Fare, as it is clear that a ground for appeal under Regulation 16(3)(a) exists.

(2) Furthermore, paragraph 6 of Schedule 2 of the Regulations required the Appeals Panel, in respect of my first stage appeal under Regulation 16, to:

"decide whether to allow or not allow the appeal before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appeal is received."

The Appeals Panel failed to do so; I submitted my appeal on 01/04/2019 but the Appeals Panel only made its decision about my appeal on 04/05/2019. This is substantially longer than the permitted period of 21 days.

Whilst the Appeals Panel gave an interim response stating that my appeal was "awaiting assessment", there is no provision in the Regulations for the time period of 21 days (for the Appeals Panel to respond) to be extended for any reason.

Regulation 16(11)(b) provides that:

"Where the relevant Appeal Panel [...] fails to adhere to the time period specified in paragraph 6 of Schedule 2, the appellant is not liable to pay the penalty fare in question."

Accordingly, I am not liable to pay the Penalty Fare, due to the provisions of Regulation 16(11)(b).

I await your appeal response confirming that my appeal has been upheld.

Yours faithfully,

@king100011

@furlong what do you reckon of this?
 

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,475
Location
Reading
Yes - two procedural irregularities - and if an appeals panel is formed to consider this, that would be a further irregularity, as, upon reading this response, they should cease proceedings immediately and not ask you for any further money (and if you already paid, refund you in full) - unless they see a flaw in the arguments, constituting another appeals panel would be a waste of everyone's time as there is no decision to be made.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top