Unpaid fare

Hi All,

I'm sure this question has been asked before but would appreciate any advice.

Today I got on a cross country train from Newcastle to Durham. Ticket inspector got to me and I tried to purchase a ticket but in the wrong frame of mind got myself confused asked for Chester-le-street to Durham (it's one less station). Admitted it straight away and tried to correct myself but inspector decided I was lying and wanted to take a statement. I was running late for the train and had ran on (ticket barriers were open).

I take it all on the chin and was a moment of lapsed judgement - though I have seen people purchase tickets on train before so thought it was allowed. The ticket inspector was a pleasent enough lady and maybe I should've had my guard up.

Anyway I wrongly assumed I would be issued with a fine and a slap on the wrist or something along those lines but instead she didn't take any payment from me and just issued a zero fare ticket.

Now googling after the event I'm now worried about all of the things I've read on prosecutions.

I didn't give an sob stories or extended reasoning to the inspector apart from admit it was a silly thing to do on my part and that I was sorry etc. But now worried I will be made an example of for £6-£7.

Can anyone shed any light on what's likely to happen?

Many thanks in advance

Katy Cheung said:

Hi All,

I'm sure this question has been asked before but would appreciate any advice.

Today I got on a cross country train from Newcastle to Durham. Ticket inspector got to me and I tried to purchase a ticket but in the wrong frame of mind got myself confused asked for Chester-le-street to Durham (it's one less station). Admitted it straight away and tried to correct myself but inspector decided I was lying and wanted to take a statement. I was running late for the train and had ran on (ticket barriers were open).

I take it all on the chin and was a moment of lapsed judgement - though I have seen people purchase tickets on train before so thought it was allowed. The ticket inspector was a pleasent enough lady and maybe I should've had my guard up.

Anyway I wrongly assumed I would be issued with a fine and a slap on the wrist or something along those lines but instead she didn't take any payment from me and just issued a zero fare ticket.

Now googling after the event I'm now worried about all of the things I've read on prosecutions.

I didn't give an sob stories or extended reasoning to the inspector apart from admit it was a silly thing to do on my part and that I was sorry etc. But now worried I will be made an example of for £6-£7.

Can anyone shed any light on what's likely to happen?

Many thanks in advance

Click to expand...

I have one question - was saying Chester-le-Street a legitimate mistake, or did you hope to pay the lesser fare from Chester-le-Street by saying that?

Either way, I have some good news and some bad news.

The good news is that a ticket from Chester-le-Street to Durham is shown as valid via Newcastle on CrossCountry's own website - see here! So this means that I think it would be difficult for them to prosecute an offence under Section 5(3)(a) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 (RoRA) - as you would not be evading payment of any fare, even if you had maintained that you wanted a ticket from Chester-le-Street, as the fare is valid via Newcastle, provided you use direct trains, as you did, to and from Newcastle (to/from Chester-le-Street and Durham respectively). RoRA is the more serious legislation that they could potentially prosecute under, so it is good if that isn't possible.

The bad news is that, regardless of the validity of a ticket from Chester-le-Street to Durham via Newcastle, you still committed an offence merely in boarding the train without a valid ticket. I think we can be fairly certain that, unless you happened to travel at a time where the ticket office in Newcastle was shut and you wanted to pay by a method that the ticket machines don't accept (e.g. Rail Travel Voucher), there would have been facilities for you to buy a ticket before boarding. This being the case, you have committed an offence under Byelaw 18(1) of the Railway Byelaws 2005.

Further bad news is that the fine upon conviction is on the same scale, regardless of whether you are convicted under S5(3)(a) of RoRA, or Byelaw 18(1). However, some limited good news is that, in certain cases, CrossCountry are known to sometimes agree to settle these kinds of incidents out of Court, typically by way of the passenger paying the outstanding fare(s), in addition to an administration charge of around £80-100. And if you are convicted under Byelaw 18(1), there is no associated criminal record, as the conviction is considered 'spent' immediately - unlike a conviction under RoRA, which remains 'unspent' for one year after conviction.

At the moment, there is not a lot you can do, except wait until you hear back from CrossCountry (or, more likely, their irregularity investigating agency, Transport Investigations Limited, aka TIL). That may be very soon, equally it might be another 4 or 5 months. They have up to 6 months from the date of the incident to lay papers before the Court to start a prosecution, if that's what they want to do - so that's the only absolute deadline in this all. Remember, though, that they are under no obligation to offer you any out of Court settlement at all, so if they do write back to you, come back here and we can help you further.

Just one note for the future - if you're going to jump on the train without a ticket (don't, but that is besides the point!), firstly avoid CrossCountry as they are probably one of the more prosecution-"happy" train companies, and secondly don't change your 'origin' station "mid-stream"! It's better to say, "just a minute, I'm not very familiar with the area, what was the last station again?", or something like that, rather than blurting something out and then realising your mistake afterwards. Of course, hindsight is 20/20!

Most of what @ForTheLoveOf says is correct, however it is possible (though unlikely) for Cross Country to prosecute under the RoRA even though the fare from Chester-le-Street is valid via Newcastle since (a) boarding at a staffed station without buying a ticket can be said to demonstrate intent to avoid payment; and especially (b) since you didn't actually travel from Chester-le-Street and could be trying to take advantage of a loophole fare.

najaB said:

boarding at a staffed station without buying a ticket can be said to demonstrate intent to avoid payment

Click to expand...

We've been through this before and let's not go into it in any more tedious detail. The relevant case bears no similarity to this situation, other than that both involved people who didn't pay the correct fare before boarding. Everything else was different, and it's very confusing to bring this into it. Any such suggestion made by TIL/XC is wildly inaccurate, legally speaking.

najaB said:

since you didn't actually travel from Chester-le-Street and could be trying to take advantage of a loophole fare.

Click to expand...

That still isn't "intent to avoid payment", because "avoid" suggests that the fare you are trying to obtain must be invalid for the journey you have made/are making. For example, let's say there was another station between C-l-S and Durham - if you asked for a ticket from there (for example, the now-closed Plawsworth), and it wasn't valid via Newcastle, that would constitute avoid. Avoid isn't even about trying to underpay - it is simply about the intention of paying the incorrect fare. A ticket from C-l-S is a valid and correct fare for travel from Newcastle to Durham (even if somewhat unusual), thus there's no intent to avoid payment.

And this is quite besides the point - if you quickly correct yourself it should be quite eminently clear that you aren't "trying it on". Someone who was doing that would wait for the RPI to 'correct' them.

So, you are able to 100% guarantee that there is no possible way that XC will seek to prosecute under the RoRA?

I'm not sure the thread is best served by a very detailed exploration of this legal point, except to note to Katy that the point is not agreed upon; and it is probably fair to note that more of us agree with NajaB than with ForTheLoveOf, but a minority can be right of course. We can return to it should CrossCountry attempt to prosecute under this legislation.

The point for now is to note that boarding without a ticket, when you could have purchased your ticket beforehand, is definitely braking some of the legislation - despite all train companies on this route usually chosing to offer passengers a 'second chance' to buy on board!

There is not much to do except wait for CrossCountry's letter, at which point an honest response asking to settle the matter out of court is likely to be a good idea.

Thanks for the replies everyone, much appreciated.

ForTheLoveOf said:

Further bad news is that the fine upon conviction is on the same scale, regardless of whether you are convicted under S5(3)(a) of RoRA, or Byelaw 18(1).

Click to expand...

What is the level of this fine?

Stupid lapse in judgement. Will wait for the letter. Pretty sure the officers report will say I lied intentionally as she told me I lied and I didn't bother trying to correct her as I felt bad about getting on without a ticket and was just using my time to apologise which in hindsight perhaps would be taken as an admission of guilt on all counts.

Think it's fair enough I should pay some sort of fine. It's more this escalation to prosecution that concerns me and feels extreme if it goes that far. (All the googling has given me the impression they like to do this with every case)

Is there anything I can do proactively to help my case?

Katy Cheung said:

What is the level of this fine?

Click to expand...

The Sentencing Guidelines are available to view here. In short, any fine imposed is likely to be between 50-150% of your weekly income, depending on which aggravating and mitigating factors are judged to be present, as well as the category of the offence.

Katy Cheung said:

Stupid lapse in judgement.

Click to expand...

Does that mean that you intended to pay less, or that you just mixed things up?

Katy Cheung said:

Pretty sure the officers report will say I lied intentionally as she told me I lied and I didn't bother trying to correct her as I felt bad about getting on without a ticket and was just using my time to apologise which in hindsight perhaps would be taken as an admission of guilt on all counts.

Click to expand...

Not much point worrying about it now. What's done is done - don't overthink it.

Katy Cheung said:

Think it's fair enough I should pay some sort of fine. It's more this escalation to prosecution that concerns me and feels extreme if it goes that far. (All the googling has given me the impression they like to do this with every case)

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, whilst I agree that Byelaw 18 is not something that should be a criminal offence, the law has been this way for 14 years now, and it doesn't look like it's changing anytime soon. For any Ticketing Irregularity Reports, where the passenger is established as having been in the wrong, the usual course of action is to proceed towards prosecution. Nevertheless, it is often, though not always, possible to settle out of Court.

Katy Cheung said:

Is there anything I can do proactively to help my case?

Click to expand...

Not really, no. It's just a case of waiting - for however long, be that a few weeks or some months - until they write to you. Make sure you keep them up to date with your current address if you move.

ForTheLoveOf said:

Unfortunately, whilst I agree that Byelaw 18 is not something that should be a criminal offence, the law has been this way for 14 years now.

Click to expand...

Longer than that. The current Byelaws replaced earlier legislation with very similar provisions, and the criminal nature of fares offences goes back at least as far as the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845.

najaB said:

Longer than that. The current Byelaws replaced earlier legislation with very similar provisions, and the criminal nature of fares offences goes back at least as far as the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845.

Click to expand...

I was referring specifically to strict-liability legislation for failing to have a ticket. That existed from around the early part of the railways until the early 1900s, when several unfavourable (to the train companies) Court decisions killed it off, then it remained more or less dead until 2005 - being an offence, but one that you could, at worst, be removed from the railway for, and not prosecuted.

Does that mean that you intended to pay less, or that you just mixed things up?

Click to expand...

Mixed things up. Brain wasn't engaged, bit ill at the mo, stressed at work and at home. But that's no excuse and I presume they're not bothered about hearing it. End of the day I did run onto the train in a rush without a ticket to catch it when I shouldn't have.

Let's hope they don't make me stew for months before sending me the letter and put me out of my misery.

It surprises me that there's not more awareness of the train company's powers. Surely that would go a long way to act as a deterrent?

Thanks all for your speedy replies. You're a very knowledgeable bunch.

Katy Cheung said:

Mixed things up. Brain wasn't engaged, bit ill at the mo, stressed at work and at home. But that's no excuse and I presume they're not bothered about hearing it. End of the day I did run onto the train in a rush without a ticket to catch it when I shouldn't have.

Let's hope they don't make me stew for months before sending me the letter and put me out of my misery.

It surprises me that there's not more awareness of the train company's powers. Surely that would go a long way to act as a deterrent?

Thanks all for your speedy replies. You're a very knowledgeable bunch.

Click to expand...

I agree - the previous Northern franchise seemed one of few operators that actually (slightly) advertised the potential ramifications of boarding without a ticket, where you could have bought one. But new Northern doesn't do that, and I'm certainly not aware of any other operator that advertises it. Seems a little underhanded, doesn't it!

The fact that you merely mixed things up, rather than intentionally stating the wrong station, is still relevant - it means that you didn't have intent to avoid payment, at least from what your thoughts were. Of course, it will be a question of convincing CrossCountry of the same...

ForTheLoveOf said:

if you quickly correct yourself it should be quite eminently clear that you aren't "trying it on". Someone who was doing that would wait for the RPI to 'correct' them.

Click to expand...

I think there's something missing here. Did the TM/RPI question the request for a ticket from Chester-le-Street, prompting the correction by the OP? Yes, such a ticket may be valid but why would you try to buy it on the second leg of the journey?

snail said:

Yes, such a ticket may be valid but why would you try to buy it on the second leg of the journey?

Click to expand...

*cough*Loophole fare*cough*

snail said:

I think there's something missing here. Did the TM/RPI question the request for a ticket from Chester-le-Street, prompting the correction by the OP? Yes, such a ticket may be valid but why would you try to buy it on the second leg of the journey?

Click to expand...

If we put ourselves in that hypothetical situation, it would be because one wanted to pay the lesser fare from C-l-S - a nevertheless equally valid fare.

I think the point is that if you want to "exploit" a perfectly valid "loophole fare", you cannot count on the TOC co-operating in your venture if you choose to pay on board.

Silverdale said:

I think the point is that if you want to "exploit" a perfectly valid "loophole fare", you cannot count on the TOC co-operating in your venture if you choose to pay on board.

Click to expand...

Exactly. If you were genuinely travelling on that route in full then you would/should get the ticket on the TPE train to Newcastle. Or at the booking office...

Silverdale said:

I think the point is that if you want to "exploit" a perfectly valid "loophole fare", you cannot count on the TOC co-operating in your venture if you choose to pay on board.

Click to expand...

Absolutely - agreed. I would have some understanding for it if the TOC said that they'll tolerate buying on board because you were in a rush, but you can't buy anything other than a plain, undiscounted A to B undiscounted single (A being your boarding station). But I really suggest that XC don't try and go for RoRA, as that is very, very murky in a case like this.

When I was being told off she made notes in her notebook and I can't remember her writing anything about chester le street in there. She just asked me whether I got on the train without a ticket and whether I had means to buy one (at the time I thought she meant money, but I now presume she was asking whether I walked past the ticket machines). I don't think she wrote down that I said I ran on in a hurry. she did write down my apology and read it back to me. So I presume theyre not going to think about the c-l-s thing at all as she didn't sell me that fare.

ForTheLoveOf said:

But I really suggest that XC don't try and go for RoRA, as that is very, very murky in a case like this.

Click to expand...

Assuming undiscounted fares, the single Anytime fare for the journey the OP made was £7.20. The fare for the ticket they asked for was £4.80.

I agree it is somewhat murky, but I'm not as confident as you that they wouldn't achieve a successful RoRA prosecution based on the specific circumstances (not having purchased before travelling from a major staffed station and asking for a loophole fare).

Don't forget all those lovely TVMs that you'd have to walk past whichever way you entered the station.

Katy Cheung said:

I presume theyre not going to think about the c-l-s thing at all as she didn't sell me that fare.

Click to expand...

It's not quite that simple - the legislation includes "attempts to travel" without paying the correct fare as an offence.

Wallsendmag said:

Don't forget all those lovely TVMs that you'd have to walk past whichever way you entered the station.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how this post aids the OP in any way as they said they ran on because they were late for the train, but if you are talking about Newcastle it is very easy to enter without passing any TVMs.

najaB said:

Assuming undiscounted fares, the single Anytime fare for the journey the OP made was £7.20. The fare for the ticket they asked for was £4.80.

I agree it is somewhat murky, but I'm not as confident as you that they wouldn't achieve a successful RoRA prosecution based on the specific circumstances (not having purchased before travelling from a major staffed station and asking for a loophole fare).

Click to expand...

That it might be considered a loophole fare is irrelevant - it is a valid ticket.

ForTheLoveOf said:

That it might be considered a loophole fare is irrelevant - it is a valid ticket.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I don't think it's that black and white. Had the OP been on a train from Chester-le-Street to Newcastle then there would be no question of its validity. However, it requires a double back, which the OP didn't make.

najaB said:

Unfortunately, I don't think it's that black and white. Had the OP been on a train from Chester-le-Street to Newcastle then there would be no question of its validity. However, it requires a double back, which the OP didn't make.

Click to expand...

The fare is an Anytime Day Single. That is unquestionably valid for break of journey, which includes starting late.

I asked some legal 'contacts' about this case, and they agreed that it would be exceptionally difficult for XC to prove intent to avoid payment.

sheff1 said:

I fail to see how this post aids the OP in any way as they said they ran on because they were late for the train, but if you are talking about Newcastle it is very easy to enter without passing any TVMs.

Click to expand...

Is it , please enlighten me.

ForTheLoveOf said:

The fare is an Anytime Day Single. That is unquestionably valid for break of journey, which includes starting late.

I asked some legal 'contacts' about this case, and they agreed that it would be exceptionally difficult for XC to prove intent to avoid payment.

Click to expand...

Being the slow one I've only just understood what you told me in your original post. Would the fact that I was on a train that actually stopped at chester-le-street matter (because the assumption would be that you would get the ticket to go via Newcastle to get a direct train to Durham)?

I really hope you're right ForTheLoveOf and they see this at head office and it's factors into what legislation they want to throw at me. I'm not sure I dare be cheeky enough to point this out to them in my grovelling response.

ForTheLoveOf said:

The fare is an Anytime Day Single. That is unquestionably valid for break of journey, which includes starting late.

Click to expand...

I don't dispute that the ticket would be valid for starting at Newcastle - if the OP already held it when boarding the train at Newcastle.

The difficulty I see is that the OP didn't start their journey at Chester-le-Street, they started at Newcastle. Hence "his fare" (for purpose of RoRA 5.3) would be the Newcastle to Durham fare.

najaB said:

Hence "his fare" (for purpose of RoRA 5.3) would be the Newcastle to Durham fare.

Click to expand...

A dangerous assumption, but even if it is held to be the case - intending to pay another, lesser but still valid, fare doesn't necessarily make out intent to avoid payment. Essentially, you are saying that, when you board a train without a ticket, the only possible fare you can ask for is from [station you boarded] to [station you're getting off at], and that asking for any other fare, e.g. a cheaper but still valid one, is automatically intent to avoid payment. That is certainly not what I have taken from my contacts' views on the matter.

Like I have said, I would be surprised if XC try RoRA, if they let someone who actually knows the difference between the laws take a look at it. Of course they may say they're going with RoRA in the hopes of scaring OP into entering a guilty plea.

Katy Cheung said:

Being the slow one I've only just understood what you told me in your original post. Would the fact that I was on a train that actually stopped at chester-le-street matter (because the assumption would be that you would get the ticket to go via Newcastle to get a direct train to Durham)?

I really hope you're right ForTheLoveOf and they see this at head office and it's factors into what legislation they want to throw at me. I'm not sure I dare be cheeky enough to point this out to them in my grovelling response.

Click to expand...

The fact that the train stopped at Chester-le-Street is not exactly going to help your case, as it means that there isn't a logical reason or 'excuse' for wanting to double back between C-l-S and Newcastle. But at least the situation is less dubious than it might be if you had made the journey in the opposite direction, and had asked for a ticket to C-l-S, having just called there (whereupon, in some peoples' view, the ticket would have expired).

It's far from guaranteed that the people who make the decision on your case will see this thread. Always reckon with the worst - that they see any incriminating parts, and that they don't see any of the parts where innocence is established.

No point deciding now what you're going to say - after all, it's possible they'll offer you an out of Court settlement upfront!