Signage at Gravesend station, or other Southeastern station, and contested station of origin

Foster · 26 Jul 2019

Hi there. I was wondering whether any kind person who's travelling through Gravesend station (edit: or other Southeastern station) would be able to take some pictures of the penalty fare notices posted there?

Living a fair way away, I'm not able to travel there myself to take them for less than the cost of the penalty fare!

RailUK Forums

30907 · 27 Jul 2019

Sorry, I can't help, but are you intending to challenge the wording of the signage (in which case presumably any SE PF station will have the same) or its (poor) location?

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

Thanks for the reply. Either really!

The regs say the signage should say "Please buy your ticket before you travel otherwise you may be charged a Penalty Fare", but the posters I saw on Google streetview from May 2018 say "have to pay" instead of "be charged". Streetview for May 2019 shows no posters at all outside the station entrance, but they might have moved them inside.

I wouldn't usually go down this route as it feels a bit nit-picking, but the PFN issued says I had travelled from Gravesend instead of Stone Crossing, where the ticket machine was out of order, and the appeals people are refusing to accept the the PFN was incorrect. My mistake for not checking when talking to the collector at London Bridge, but I realised a minute after and he advised that although he accepted that (and he confirmed that the ticket machine at Stone Crossing was indeed out of order) he couldn't now change it himself and said that I would have to challenge it though appeal. I should have got something in writing from him.

I've also asked for CCTV from Southeastern, but as I'm now down to my last appeal, I wanted a backup in case they don't send that in time, or it's already been deleted.

Can anyone confirm that Southeastern's posters still say "have to pay"?

30907 · 28 Jul 2019

There are members of this forum who believe that such incorrect wording (I doubt it has been changed) invalidates the PF and that a court would uphold that.
I will leave them to pursue that aspect. However, as you travelled from Stone Crossing, I can't see why the wording at Gravesend is relevant.

Indeed, as by your account the PF should not have been issued, I wonder whether your MP or Transport Focus might be worth contacting. You might need to give details of your journey and explain why the staff member at London Bridge believed you had travelled from Gravesend.

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

Thanks.
I'm hoping to get the CCTV showing me boarding at Stone Crossing in time for the appeal deadline. If so then it should be cancelled as the ticket machine there was out of order, which is why I didn't have a ticket.

If not then I'll have to appeal based on the incorrect assumption that the appeals board will take that I did indeed board at Gravesend, and so the signage there will be relevant.

I'm assuming that if I have to go down the second route then the burden of proof would fall on me to show that the poster is incorrect, and so a recent photo of their poster (ideally at Gravesend itself, but any Southeastern station if not) would be of great help. I'll be pointing out the constrast between the "exact wording" and "words to the effect of" sub-paragraphs that appear in the same section as evidence of the intent of the regulations.

I will of course report back on the appeal, and hopefully be able to answer what seems to be a currently open question.

Islineclear3_1 · 28 Jul 2019

What exactly did you tell the Revenue Inspector at London Bridge?

If you told him that you boarded at Stone Crossing (and were truthful), then I am curious as to why he issued a PFN from Gravesend

Why would he do that?

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

I can't remember exactly what I said, however as I had originally intended to travel from Gravesend it's quite possible that I said the wrong thing initially.

The Revenue Inspector (who I'd approached myself immediately on getting off the train at London Bridge) was quite satisfied, as I'd told him the machine was out of order to start with, but he had replied that the machines at the station were working. Only after the ticket had been printed did I notice, and he was happy to confirm that the ones at SC weren't working.

Anyway, I'm hoping for the CCTV images to demonstrate my actual journey. If not then I'll be taking the signage defence.

Clip · 28 Jul 2019

Carb will probably have been over written by now depending on when the incident was but if you're at a last chance saloon then I'm guessing it was a while ago

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

The journey was on the 6th July, so I'm not holding out much hope for the CCTV! Even if it's held for 30 days, it might be after that before SE get around to responding to my Subject Access Request.

I'd excepted the appeals people to at least get in touch with the Revenue Inspector for comment - the inspector's comments to me implied that he thought this would all be sorted out fairly simply with a standard appeal - but the response I got was:-

"A penalty fare notice is a legal document which PSL has a right to assume is correct and has no authority
to alter. Any incorrect information recorded on a notice should be brought to the attention of the authorised
collector at the time of issue. [Which I did, and kept saying I did!]
To determine liability, therefore, the appeal has been judged in accordance with the origin station stated on
the notice."

It seems that only evidence that I could produce myself would be considered, and thought that the CCTV might well do that, but the clock is running down.

Hence the requests on here for help in presenting evidence of incorrect signage

I do consider it to be nit-picking, but I'm not doing it to dodge an otherwise correctly issued penalty fare, just that it seems my only avenue to avoid a penalty I feel I have no moral responsibility to pay.
It's not worth me travelling down there myself for more that the cost of the penalty!

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

The inspector has copied my name from my id card incorrectly as well: misspelling my first name, and getting the names the wrong way around. I understand that the appeals body won't rule on that (just whether the operating company have followed the regulations), but I don't suppose that's grounds for the PFN to be declared invalid when they come to collect?

A bit galling if some parts are treated as gospel and others aren't!

furlong · 28 Jul 2019

The burden of proof lies with the company in an appeal. It's for them to show that something you state in an appeal is false, but of course if you supply your own evidence it's likely to help. If this is now your final appeal, you should appeal listing multiple grounds separately, and write it up formally referencing the rules directly in each case.

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

The next will be the third appeal. The appeals body so far have not dealt with the matter in that way, as I has presumed they would, by asking Southeastern to prove that Gravesend was my station of origin...

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

My last appeal started

"I repeat that I contest the penalty fare under regulation 6(2)(a) as there were "no facilities in operation for the sale of a travel ticket for that passenger’s journey". This does not say 'as printed on the PFN', but refers to the actual journey made."

furlong · 28 Jul 2019

So I don't really understand the response you received. If you stated what you've written here, then I would think the appeals body is required to uphold the appeal unless the company provides evidence otherwise - i.e. the inspector tells them that what you say didn't happen and then they choose not to believe your account. If, in fact you travelled from SC, and the notice says Gravesend, then surely it wasn't validly issued. Do you make this journey often? Do you have tickets from earlier occasions? Anything else that would help to suggest it was SC?

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

It was a one-off journey I'm afraid.

I'm re-reading the regulations, and this does indeed seem quite clearly in agreement with you:

Appeals – stage one
[...]
(4) Where the appellant makes representations as part of an appeal under this regulation in relation to any of the matters specified in paragraph (5), it is for the operator on whose behalf the penalty fare was charged to provide evidence that reasonably demonstrates that any fact described by the appellant in relation to any of those matters is not true.

(5) The matters referred to in paragraph (4) are—

(a)in circumstances where the appellant was charged a penalty fare in relation to travelling by, being present on, or leaving a train—

(i)by which train and preceding train or trains, if any, the appellant was travelling or had travelled or on which train the appellant was present or had been present;

(ii)at which station the appellant boarded the train and any preceding train or trains and at which station the appellant intended to leave that train;

I am making a representation (albeit not presenting evidence myself). I suppose it could be argued that the PFN itself is evidence from SE, but I am specifically contesting that, and the response I got does not make it clear that SE themselves are presenting this as counter-evidence.

However, the appeals body appears to be disregarding the regulations that apply to the appeals process itself.

furlong · 28 Jul 2019

No, the PFN is not the evidence referred to.

FYI it's common for threads on here to see the first two levels of appeal misapply the rules in the railway's favour, so there's nothing surprising here. Often the person making the appeal doesn't express their appeal very well either in terms of the rules. But as you've just one chance left - which is to a more 'independent' panel from outside the railway - it's important to lay out all the reasons logically and separately and quote all the bits of the rules that matter, leaving them no wriggle room. Note that the focus remains on the circumstances relating to the PF itself, and while it might sometimes be relevant to explain what you think was wrong with an earlier response to an appeal, in effect you're just explaining the original argument better, as an error by an appeals body does not itself provide grounds to uphold an appeal.

Foster · 28 Jul 2019

Thanks for your help on this. I will be quoting chapter and verse on all arguments this time. It might have to be by post, as the form only allows 2000 characters, which is a bit short if everything has to be spelled out.
I'll have a go at drafting tomorrow.

Cheers

NeilCr · 29 Jul 2019

I will be going through Ramsgate Station later in the week

If I get a chance (and I can find them!) happy to take pictures of any penalty fare signs there. I may be in a hurry, though, but will give it a go if still required.

Islineclear3_1 · 29 Jul 2019

deleted

furlong · 29 Jul 2019

robert7111a said:
I found this...might be of some use to the OP?

No - that document is dated 2009, and the government quietly scrapped all the existing schemes when it replaced the rules with the ones the OP has already been referencing, so many of the things the company claimed to do in that document no longer matter.

Islineclear3_1 · 29 Jul 2019

furlong said:
No - that document is dated 2009, and the government quietly scrapped all the existing schemes when it replaced the rules with the ones the OP has already been referencing, so many of the things the company claimed to do in that document no longer matter.

Ok thanks, have deleted...

Foster · 29 Jul 2019

Thank you NeilCr. That would be very useful.

How does this look?

The regulations referred to in this appeal are The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018, SI 2018/366.

I make representation that the information on the Penalty Charge Notice regarding which station I boarded the train is incorrect and that I boarded the train at Stone Crossing.

This is a representation specifically allowed for by regulation 16(5)(a)(ii). Under regulation 16(4) is it for Southeastern to provide evidence that reasonably demonstrates that this is not true.

That representation being made I appeal under regulation 6(3)(a) on the grounds that the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the regulations. The specific grounds for my appeal are:

(1) that the exclusion given in regulation 6(2)(a) applies as the ticket machine at Stone Crossing was not operational at the time of my departure, 9.36am on 6th July 2019; and

(2) that the requirement of shed. 1 1(1)(c) of the regulations was not followed in contravention of regulation 8(2).

In support of (2) I attach a photograph showing the standard notice currently in use by Southeastern which shows wording which differs from that which is required by shed. 1 1(1)(c) of the regulations.

NeilCr · 29 Jul 2019

No problem but no promises as the end of the week is complicated for me. Don't ask!

But will do my level best

Dai Corner · 29 Jul 2019

If you want to introduce CCTV evidence how about requesting them to produce images of you at Gravesend station rather than at Stone Crossing? Obviously they won't be able to.

NeilCr · 1 Aug 2019

Here is the sign at Ramsgate

Foster · 1 Aug 2019

That's wonderful Neil. Thank you so much!

NeilCr · 1 Aug 2019

No problem

You owe me a beer if we ever meet!

Typhoon · 3 Aug 2019

Went through Gravesend yesterday. Penalty fare notice on platform 0 has the same words as #25 but is slightly different ('Penalty fare of £20' is in red) but the wording ('may have to pay' and 'may be charged') are the same. We did not stop at Stone Crossing. Notice on platform 2 looked the same. I can send you a photograph of the sign on Platform 0 if you wish. Battery died just after that.

talltim · 3 Aug 2019

Surely it’s the legality of the PF posters at Stone Crossing you should be examining? Whether the posters at Gravesend are right or not, you wont have seen them if you haven’t been there.

island · 7 Aug 2019

Were you wanting to pay cash or card? The TVM at Stone Crossing is card only, so if you were wanting to pay by cash you would have an additional arguable point.

Signage at Gravesend station, or other Southeastern station, and contested station of origin

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Member

Attachments

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Attachments

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member