Appealing unpaid fare notice

[miami]

I boarded the 08:11 train this morning from Wilmslow, due into Euston at 1006 (it actually arrived a few minutes early)

After Crewe there was a ticket check and I presented the return half of a London-Edinburgh Super off peak return

The train guard claimed this was invalid, and phoned ahead to be met at the station. e took my ticket for a while, so

At Euston I'm met by some redcoats, including a "team leader". They refused to accept the ticket was valid. In the mean time the guard had no idea what the "9F" in the corner meant.

They also phoned for "Dave", who apparently is the final word at Euston. He also claimed it wasn't valid.

They issued me an unpaid fare notice (reason 03 - Travel Beyond Validity), which I obviously intend to appeal.

For entertainment these are the excuses they came up with:
1) I hadn't broken my journey as I hadn't been to Edinburgh (I have actually, lovely city)
2) This is a peak time train
3) I have avoided paying the correct fare - he seemed very adamant that I agree with him over that, of course I refused as I paid the cheapest fare I could that was legal for the journey I made.
4) They acknowleged that a ticket from Manchester to London would be valid for boarding at Wilmslow, but a ticket from Edinburgh to London isn't "because a ticket from Wilmslow on this train is more expensive"
5) They claimed knowlege of the routing gude, yet claimed that Wilmslow wasn't on the route as the train from Edinburgh does not stop there
6) Said "it's not on route if you have to change trains"
7) Said ticket would be valid if I had come from Edinburgh that day, but as I hadn't it's not valid
8) Said as I hadn't started my journey in Edinburgh the ticket wasn't valid
9) Break of journey provisions do not apply overnight
10) The guard refused to issue a receipt when he took it from me on the train, probably in violation of section 20. I got him to note on the outbound that he had the return half.

They refused to allow me to record the conversation, so those are just my written notes.

Here's my first draft at the appeal letter

Dear Sir
On the 9th of December I boarded the 0811 Wilmslow to London train, due to arrive at London at 1006. There was a ticket check after Crewe, the train guard claimed my ticket was not valid.

The ticket I presented was the return half of a Super Off Peak return from London Terminals to Edinburgh, bought on November 30th, and valid until December 29th 2015, which cost £134.20, route Any Permitted. A copy of this ticket is attached.

After a limited attempt of assertion of my rights and attempt to show the conditions of carriage, I agreed to wait until Euston where your guard had arranged for his colleagues to meet me.

As the national rail conditions of carriage section 16 states

"16. Starting, breaking or ending a journey at intermediate stations
You may start, or break and resume, a journey (in either direction in the case of a return
ticket) at any intermediate station, as long as the ticket you hold is valid for the trains you
want to use. You may also end your journey (in either direction in the case of a return
ticket) before the destination shown on the ticket. However, these rights may not apply to
some types of tickets for which a break of journey is prohibited, in which case the Ticket
Seller must make this clear when you buy your ticket."

And section 13aiii states
"13. The route you are entitled to take
(a) You may travel between the stations shown on the ticket you hold in:
(iii) trains which take the routes shown in the National Routeing Guide."

With the national routeing guide states that a London-Edinburgh and return ticket is valid on map LM, which includes Manchester-Wilmslow-Crewe-London

And this ticket carries validity code 9F, meaning that it is valid on trains arriving at London Euston at 1005 or later and there are no special provisions prohibiting break of journey on either the outbound or return legs

I believe I presented a valid ticket for the journey I made that morning. If this isn't the case could you explain exactly where in the conditions of carriage this is disallowed.

If I am correct, I would appreciate it if you could cancel this notice as soon as possible

Thank you
*my name here*

 

[yorkie]

http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=EUS&dest=EDB&grpo=1072&tkt=SSR

RETURN TRAVEL
Not valid on trains timed to
arrive:
....
LONDON EUSTON after 04:29 and
before 10:05, except on
ScotRail Caledonian Sleepers
(with supplement);

Your train was due to arrive 1006.

Appeal, yes, and I'd add a £10 (minimum) admin fee.

Further steps you can take if necessary:-

• Complain to Transport Focus
• Report a franchise breach to the DfT ( [email protected]. uk )
• Report a breach of consumer legislation to the ORR

 

[Legend]

I boarded the 08:11 train this morning from Wilmslow, due into Euston at 1006 (it actually arrived a few minutes early)

After Crewe there was a ticket check and I presented the return half of a London-Edinburgh Super off peak return

The train guard claimed this was invalid, and phoned ahead to be met at the station. e took my ticket for a while, so

At Euston I'm met by some redcoats, including a "team leader". They refused to accept the ticket was valid. In the mean time the guard had no idea what the "9F" in the corner meant.

They also phoned for "Dave", who apparently is the final word at Euston. He also claimed it wasn't valid.

They issued me an unpaid fare notice (reason 03 - Travel Beyond Validity), which I obviously intend to appeal.

For entertainment these are the excuses they came up with:
1) I hadn't broken my journey as I hadn't been to Edinburgh (I have actually, lovely city)
2) This is a peak time train
3) I have avoided paying the correct fare - he seemed very adamant that I agree with him over that, of course I refused as I paid the cheapest fare I could that was legal for the journey I made.
4) They acknowleged that a ticket from Manchester to London would be valid for boarding at Wilmslow, but a ticket from Edinburgh to London isn't "because a ticket from Wilmslow on this train is more expensive"
5) They claimed knowlege of the routing gude, yet claimed that Wilmslow wasn't on the route as the train from Edinburgh does not stop there
6) Said "it's not on route if you have to change trains"
7) Said ticket would be valid if I had come from Edinburgh that day, but as I hadn't it's not valid
8) Said as I hadn't started my journey in Edinburgh the ticket wasn't valid
9) Break of journey provisions do not apply overnight
10) The guard refused to issue a receipt when he took it from me on the train, probably in violation of section 20. I got him to note on the outbound that he had the return half.

They refused to allow me to record the conversation, so those are just my written notes.

Here's my first draft at the appeal letter

Brilliant mate. I. Don't know what will happen but I think you've a great point.

 

[Jonfun]

Brilliant mate. I. Don't know what will happen but I think you've a great point.

The UPFN will be cancelled and it'll probably be passed to the pricing/revenue team to look at closing the (quite frankly ridiculous) loophole.

 

[yorkie]

1) I hadn't broken my journey as I hadn't been to Edinburgh (I have actually, lovely city)

NRCoC Condition 16 allows Break of journey, and that includes finishing short.

2) This is a peak time train

No such thing; the train is permitted under the terms of the ticket you held. I'd be asking what steps they will be taking to ensure that their staff are aware of this in future.

3) I have avoided paying the correct fare - he seemed very adamant that I agree with him over that, of course I refused as I paid the cheapest fare I could that was legal for the journey I made.

You paid the correct fare for the ticket held, which is a valid ticket.

4) They acknowleged that a ticket from Manchester to London would be valid for boarding at Wilmslow, but a ticket from Edinburgh to London isn't "because a ticket from Wilmslow on this train is more expensive"

Manchester to London tickets are irrelevant; the T&Cs of the ticket you held are relevant. Contract law applies.

5) They claimed knowlege of the routing gude, yet claimed that Wilmslow wasn't on the route as the train from Edinburgh does not stop there

If they have knowledge of the routeing guide, they are obviously misunderstanding that knowledge. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Calling points are irrelevant to the routeing guide.

6) Said "it's not on route if you have to change trains"

Nonsense!

7) Said ticket would be valid if I had come from Edinburgh that day, but as I hadn't it's not valid

Making up their own rules!

8) Said as I hadn't started my journey in Edinburgh the ticket wasn't valid

Again, NRCoC 16 says otherwise.

9) Break of journey provisions do not apply overnight

Nonsense

10) The guard refused to issue a receipt when he took it from me on the train, probably in violation of section 20. I got him to note on the outbound that he had the return half.

Indeed, they are required to issue a receipt.

The TM clearly is in breach of consumer law, contract law, the NRCoC and the TSA (compliance with which is a franchise commitment and is not optional)

Virgin Strains to break the rules again!:roll:

Virgin need to distance themselves from the actions taken by their staff, put in place proper training (and checks) and ensure you are both fully refunded and compensated. Anything less is unacceptable.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The UPFN will be cancelled and it'll probably be passed to the pricing/revenue team to look at closing the (quite frankly ridiculous) loophole.

It is ridiculous that the cost of Manchester - London be deemed to be far higher than the cost of Edinburgh - London, but it really doesn't matter to the facts of this case. They also need to do much more than just cancel the UPFN!

 

[ainsworth74]

I remember thinking this was valid when you first brought it up on the forum and I still think it's valid now. I'd fight this (though I'm not personally a fan of demanding 'admin fees' and similar) and I think your draft is perfectly suitable.

 

[gray1404]

What is the appeal address on the UPFN? Is it to Virgin or to an appeals body? I would appeal and make a formal complaint to Virgin Trains. I do think a number of people need adressing here. The Train Manager being one of them, the peple he spoke to on the phone, plus the people who meet the train at Euston including the Team Leader and "Dave". Very shocking that none of those people had any knowledge of the routing guide and the conditions that tickets are issue subject to an then resport to making up incorrect information. For future reference too, I believe there is nothing they can actually do to stop you from recording conversations. Also, they delayed you and I'd be looking at compensation from Virgin too.

Was an UPFN the correct form to issue. I'm wonering if a TIR would be better suited. Did you sign the UPFN also?

And what fare was requested on the UPFN? Given the book of excuses and that the Edinburgh train doesn't all at the station you boarded, did he accept your ticket was valid from Crewe to Euston - after all the Edinburgh train stops there doesn't it so did he only UPFN you from Wilmslow to Crewe! I suspect not and it was for your entire journey.

Your draft letter looks good and overs all the main points.

 

[bb21]

On the point about a receipt being given, I could be wrong but AIUI this is not compulsory. The purpose of a receipt being issued is to allow the passenger to complete his journey. If the passenger is at his journey's end, there is no requirement for a receipt to be issued.

However this does not excuse the appalling lack of knowledge demonstrated by several members of Virgin staff in this story.

As for this ticket being a loophole, this is only so because someone decided that Manchester passengers are ripe for picking with the extortionate fares charged on some peak services. (Even the word "extortionate" is understating it imo.)

 

[furlong]

On the point about a receipt being given, I could be wrong but AIUI this is not compulsory.

The ticket is "your evidence of your right to make a rail journey" and "evidence of a contract between you and..." (NRCOC). If a company wishes to confiscate that evidence unilaterally for whatever reason, you are surely entitled to expect alternative evidence to be provided if you require it - or else the company could be seen as deliberately trying to impede you from bringing a subsequent claim against the company under the contract.

 

[bb21]

... in which case I would expect a suitable endorsement as obtained by the OP to be a workaround?

I am only going by the instructions I am aware of so I think seeking a suitable endorsement is a great idea.

 

[Shempz]

I remember thinking this was valid when you first brought it up on the forum and I still think it's valid now. I'd fight this (though I'm not personally a fan of demanding 'admin fees' and similar) and I think your draft is perfectly suitable.

If a TOC can demand an admin fee for investigating a case, then a passenger is within their rights to charge similar for frivolous cases like this. I get paid X per hour in my job and if I have to take time out to defend myself, then surely I am entitled to claim for my own admin fees, when my time could be better spent enjoying my life!

 

[Tetchytyke]

On the point about a receipt being given, I could be wrong but AIUI this is not compulsory. The purpose of a receipt being issued is to allow the passenger to complete his journey. If the passenger is at his journey's end, there is no requirement for a receipt to be issued.

However, if the OP had only a single ticket or had not retained the outbound portion (many ticket barriers retain tickets, for instance) then he would now have absolutely no proof that he had held a valid ticket for his journey. I cannot help but wonder whether this was the motivation of the guard.

As for claiming administration fees, there is obviously no right to any amount. However I would point out that Litigants in Person in (some) civil cases can claim up to £18 per hour in costs...

 

[ainsworth74]

If a TOC can demand an admin fee for investigating a case, then a passenger is within their rights to charge similar for frivolous cases like this. I get paid X per hour in my job and if I have to take time out to defend myself, then surely I am entitled to claim for my own admin fees, when my time could be better spent enjoying my life!

If anyone wishes to then they should feel free to do so I simply indicated that it is not something that I'm personally a fan of.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I'm not convinced that this is appropriate advice to give paulweaver :

If a TOC can demand an admin fee for investigating a case, then a passenger is within their rights to charge similar for frivolous cases like this. I get paid X per hour in my job and if I have to take time out to defend myself, then surely I am entitled to claim for my own admin fees, when my time could be better spent enjoying my life!

Much as I am sympathetic to the position you find yourself in paulweaver, your "right to charge" is no more than a right to make a request, but there is no "right" to have that charge accepted, paid or enforced. Similarly, you are not "entitled to claim" for your time in the sense that the entitlement also carries a duty for the Company to accept and pay that claim - it does not.

However, if you wanted to sue the Company and that had to be contested in Court, or the Company took Criminal or Civil proceedings against you and you chose to defend yourself against that action in a Court, then you would, at that stage, be in a position to add your own costs for your time, at the rate of your loss of income up to £19 per hour, or if there is no loss of income, at that rate of £19 per hour (see CPR 46).

I suppose you could even consider making a claim for Damages if you were obliged to suffer some loss of income, but that is not what Shempz is suggesting.

 

[miami]

Thank you Dave, I'm not after compensation (although as usual in these cases it all seems rather one-sided, innocent parties are never compensated). Given that £19 an hour is far less than what I'd make doing other work it would hardly seem likely I'd spend the effort.

What I would like is the UFN to be overturned, something to print out and hit them with (metaphorically) in future while breaking journeys legally, and ideally Virgin to actually train their staff, and an assurance that I won't have issues when travelling with a valid ticket in the future

Had I been delayed until 11.36 or later at Euston I'd also claim delay-repay, which would seem appropiate. As it was I was only delayed by 15 minutes after the train was due. I wonder if delay-repay would be based on the value of my ticket or the value of what they think I should have paid.

As for loopholes, peoples opinions are fairly irrelevant. I find it shocking that facebook paid £4,000 in tax last year, but it's legal. I also find it shocking that Virgin can charge £156 each way for Wilmslow to London, 170 miles, 91.7p per mile, for an arrival at 10.30AM and departure at 18.30, yet Barnsley to London, 172 miles, is £162 return - or less - 47p per mile.

I look forward to Virgin managing to change the NRCoC to stop break of journey on return tickets though.

The idea behind going to Edinburgh is nothing new, and not my idea. I pushed north from Lancaster 2 months ago (and in the process have saved a good) based on this BBC news article.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6442947.stm

10. LONDON-MANCHESTER FIRST CLASS
Very few savings can be made in first class as the cheaper short-distance fares don't exist, but to show how crazy the current system has become, take this example. A first class open return from London Euston to Manchester is £337 for 185 miles each way. But a first open return to Falkirk - yes, in Scotland - is £320.

This is because West Coast fares are priced by Virgin. London-Manchester is £337 return, and £355 London-Glasgow. BUT London-Falkirk is priced by GNER who have cheaper fares - and yet fares from London to Falkirk are available via either the West or the East Coast routes. So use your Falkirk ticket to Manchester, where you can break your journey (never to go on to Falkirk later).

So you pay £17 less to travel 420 miles to Falkirk than the 185 miles to Manchester. You know it makes sense.

Fares fair

A spokeswoman for the Association of Train Operating Companies agrees that combination fares are legitimate, but points out that on long distance trips, open single or return fares - used in the examples above - account for 2% of journeys.

Passenger boards a train
Is his ticket cheaper than yours?
"Ninety-eight percent of passengers travel on the wide range of discounted fares available, and which do not involve making complicated enquiries about the purchase of combination fares. Nationally, more than 80% of rail journeys are made using discounted tickets including cheap day returns, savers, and advance purchase tickets."

 

[yorkie]

You have a PM.

Also, separately, as there are several incidents of this nature (here's another recent one), I think you should be bringing this to the attention of the ORR/DfT.

 

[miami]

What is the appeal address on the UPFN? Is it to Virgin or to an appeals body? I would appeal and make a formal complaint to Virgin Trains.

Foolishly I simply followed the procedure on the UFN. I lodged it on the 10th, and after 10 days received a response on the 24th stating "case is currently on hold and is awaiting assesment".

I finally sent in the complain to Virgin at 15:16, and at 16:46 received the following response from IAS

Thank you for your correspondence concerning the above referenced Unpaid Fare Notice issued by Virgin Trains
on Wednesday 09 December 2015.

The Independent Appeals Service (IAS) is not associated with Virgin Trains. IAS provide a service which gives the
recipient of an Unpaid Fare Notice the opportunity to dispute the issue. To ensure consistency, IAS follow the
Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) guidelines when making assessments of Unpaid Fare Notice
appeals.

I acknowledge the points raised in your appeal, however the transport user is required to show on request a valid
ticket. The journey for which a ticket is valid is clear on purchase, and is clearly shown on the face of the ticket. It
is your responsibility to ensure that you only travel between the stations shown on your ticket.

As you failed to do so on this occasion, and were unable to produce a ticket valid for your entire journey, the
Inspector was correct to issue an Unpaid Fare.

The ticket that you held from Edinburgh to London Terminals was valid from Edinburgh, York to Kings Cross
station or from Edinburgh, Crewe to London Euston. Your ticket was not valid to travel off route from Wilmslow on
the line from Manchester Picadilly.

On assessment your appeal has been declined and this case is now closed.
Payment of £156.00 must be received within 14 days of the date of this letter. Full payment options and
information including, what will happen if you do not pay, are detailed with this response.

IMPORTANT: Please note that failure to pay or respond within this stated time may result in Virgin Trains taking
further action to recover the outstanding debt.
Finally, as an appeals service which is independent of Virgin Trains we are unable to investigate complaints
concerning Virgin Trains service or staff conduct. Please therefore contact Virgin Trains direct with your requests
and concerns.

Will give Virgin a few days to respond, however I will be raising it with the ORR and DFT once I calm down.

 

[bb21]

I guess that is no more than what can be expected of those so-called "independent" appeals services. The level of ignorance puts any FCC RPI to shame, including the one that handed jonmorris0844 an illegitimate Penalty Fare.

Parts of me almost want to tell you to let them take you to court, and bite them on costs from your side.

 

[Mag_seven]

If they can't even spell "Piccadilly" correctly, what hope getting valid ticket routings right?

 

[miami]

Parts of me almost want to tell you to let them take you to court, and bite them on costs from your side.

Sadly due to the uneven way

If I could claim reasonable compensation upon victory (say £100/hour on time spent), in addition to costs, I might have looked at it.

Very tempted by the press route though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If they can't even spell "Piccadilly" correctly, what hope getting valid ticket routings right?

I missed that one (I'm a terrible speller). Technically I suppose they are right, no ticket would be valid via "Manchester Picadilly", as it would be a Canadian ticket

However look at the address on this page on the network rail site:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/m/manchester_picadilly/arrivals/

 

[jkdd77]

Sadly due to the uneven way

If I could claim reasonable compensation upon victory (say £100/hour on time spent), in addition to costs, I might have looked at it.

Very tempted by the press route though.

I really hope you are not going to pay their unenforceable, illegitimate, and probably even criminal (aggressive/ misleading commercial practice contrary to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008) ransom demand? :cry:

My advice, in this specific case and this specific case only, would now be to ignore the threatening letters and the demands for payment (but, of course, do not ignore any actual court papers). Virgin won't prosecute because they know with absolute certainty that they will lose because the ticket was 100% valid, and won't bring a civil claim for the same reason.

In the profoundly unlikely event that they are foolish enough to prosecute, I'm sure you'll get plenty of help on this forum in making them regret their actions and in extracting as much compensation as possible from them.

Edit- Even were the OP off route from Crewe to Wilmslow, which he wasn't, the UFN should only have been issued from Wilmslow to the first stop along a valid line of route (presumably Crewe), not from Wilmslow to London. That's yet another reason why the UFN is invalid and unenforceable, and anothe reason why I advise the OP not to pay it.

I can't believe for one moment that Virgin would want a court, nor indeed the media, to review their catalogue of conflicting falsehoods as to why the ticket was supposedly invalid, nor their aggressive and misleading commercial practices in demanding money to which they are not entitled with menaces, namely the threat of prosecution, (and offences under the CPUTR do not require mens rea), nor the utter bias and falsehoods of the so-called "independent" appeals body.

 

[gray1404]

This totally deeply saddens me that even upon appeal they cannot even apply the rules of the routing guide correctly. Can you contact your MP now and have them raise this with the ORR and DFT on your behalf? Also, can you contact Passenger Focus?

Is it possible to make a complaint about the appeals service in its own right i.e. inability to apply correct information.

 

[bb21]

I can't believe for one moment that Virgin would want a court, nor indeed the media, to review their catalogue of conflicting falsehoods as to why the ticket was supposedly invalid, nor their aggressive and misleading commercial practices in demanding money to which they are not entitled with menaces, namely the threat of prosecution, (and offences under the CPUTR do not require mens rea), nor the utter bias and falsehoods of the so-called "independent" appeals body.

You are kidding right? Don't ya know that they are media darlings and their staff could do no wrong?

 

[Tetchytyke]

ITAL, set up by the moron responsible for Connex trains, getting a basic decision wrong?

I think I've just fallen off my chair in shock.

ITAL have their own complaints procedure, which should have been detailed to the OP in their correspondence. Again, I'm astounded that it hasn't been.

jkd77], given recent threads about CrossCountry (who also use ITAL for their extortion revenue protection), I wouldn't be so certain.

 

[Greenback]

It's a very poor response, that's for certain. My initial impression on reading this thread for the first time was that the ticket was valid, and I was pleased to see that this was a consensus amongst people who are far more knowledgeable than I am.

I'd be inclined to let them proceed against me,l confident that if the matter ever did get to court, I'd be able to demonstrate the validity of that ticket through reference to industry rules and publications such as the NRG.

 

[Steveoh]

Just out of curiosity I popped Edinburgh to London via Wilmslow into NRE journey planner and it's quite happily showing me Wilmslow via Crewe to Euston is valid. Route into Manchester via Oxford Road and out again via Stockport and Wilmslow. I'm shocked at the response, it just seems so basic a thing to get wrong.

 

[Clip]

Very very poor this. Id write back once more pointing out their error and let them know that if they want to take you to court then they can do so.

 

[Greenback]

Ever since I've looked at the Routeing Guide services between Edinburgh and London have been valid via all routes through Manchester. I haven;t looked for a while now so I'm pleased to see that we all agree that it still is and that nothing has changed!

The response to the appeal certainly needs challenging on account of it being totally and utterly incorrect. My guess is that someone has just asked the TOC, taken the reply as gospel, and not done any independent research or checks.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

The "Independant" Revenue Protection Support Services (RPSS) that some TOC's use (TPE, VTEC for two) is run by Southern! Hardly independant!

As a "Train Manager" myself I cannot see anything wrong in the OP's actions and my interpretation of the ticket conditions and routeing guides suggest to me this is perfectly and reasonably valid. The problem here is fact and interpretation.

If you have printed documentation confirming the route taken is perfectly valid, then I would allow it to go to court and let VT squirm in front of a judge. They wont know T's&C's but they will make a judgement based upon the facts presented. I cant see how VT will win imho

 

[ainsworth74]

If you have printed documentation confirming the route taken is perfectly valid, then I would allow it to go to court and let VT squirm in front of a judge. They wont know T's&C's but they will make a judgement based upon the facts presented. I cant see how VT will win imho

Agreed!

Thankfully journey planners show it as valid for travel to/from Euston via Wilmslow (including West Coast's) so a few printouts of from a couple of different ones including, if you can get the thing to work, NRE plus the relevant sections of the routeing guide should take care of the valid route element. Then a printout of this NRE page alongside details of which train the OP was on should take care of any concerns of validity in terms of time. Finally Condition 16 of the NRCoC makes it clear that you can start short if you so wish so a printout of the relevant portion of the NRCoC should deal with that.

I think that little lot should be more than sufficient for any judge to see that the OP was travelling with a valid ticket!

I would definitely be tempted to reply to Virgin and IAS with the above information and simply restate why that proves the ticket was valid and that I will be offering no further payment as a consequence. If Virgin wish to pursue the matter further they are welcome to proceed with court action which will be robustly defended against. Otherwise as far as I'm concerned the matter is closed.

I would then separately lodge complaints with both Virgin and the IAS for their poor handling of this entire affair.

But that's just me it's up to the OP to decide if they wish to be quite that combative.