Being charged under byelaw 18.2 by merseyrail

[Jellyman862]

Hi I was recently travelling with someone new I met from I think it was hunts cross to liveprool central the station had a notice saying please pay at the final stop and take a picture of this notice I did so and when going to the ticket machine in central station in the shop. it was also not working I was walking around trying to find the office when two men stopped me and pulled me aside I thought it was a drug search and was fine with it as I didn’t have any, they charged me with failing or pay a notice under 18.2 and recorded me then sent me a settlement for £125, I never got this notice until 2 weeks after when I got back from a job interview abroad and was never given a slip at the time as when they informed me I was free to go I left, now the time to pay the settlement is gone and they are taking me to court but when asking there enquiry team what the offence was they said 18.2 but in 18.3 of the byelaws it states that this only apply a if there was a flair place to buy a ticket at the begging of the journey. I need to know weather to plead guilty or fight it and I don’t have the funds to pay the settlement or and court costs so what will happen to me.

 

[JBuchananGB]

How did you get through the exit barriers at Liverpool Central? The usual experience of others who come to this forum is that the member of staff who lets through a passenger with a fare to pay, directs the passenger to the shop. They then watch the passenger until they seek to leave the station without paying. At which point they stop them and take enforcement action. Is this what happened to you?

 

[Titfield]

Did you also take a photograph of the faulty machine in the shop?

 

[Jellyman862]

Yea but we went to the ticket machine in the shop and it wasn’t working so went out to look for another form of payment my friend later informed me that you can buy a ticket at the shop but I didn’t know I thought it was just at the ticket machine that didn’t work

Did you also take a photograph of the faulty machine in the shop?

No not the one in the shop as there was no sign so I didn’t think to

 

[Bertie the bus]

Your understanding of Byelaw 18.3 is correct but I’m not convinced it still applies after you have arrived at your destination if that has an open ticket office but you still don’t buy a ticket. Others disagree.

To prevent a repeat of the same argument you might like to read this thread which is an almost identical situation to yours.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/fined-by-merseyrail-as-i-had-“come-too-far”-without-a-ticket-should-i-fight-it.262348/

Unfortunately it looks like the person who started that thread has no intention of returning to say how they got on.

As for your particular issue, as you have missed the deadline for a settlement and you can’t pay it anyway, you seem to have 2 options:

Plead guilty and reduce your fine
Plead not guilty and hope the magistrates agree with your interpretation of the relevant byelaw

As for not being able to afford the court costs, if you provide proof of income the court will take this into consideration and you may be given a payment plan if you either plead or are found guilty.

 

[JBuchananGB]

As soon as you left the shop without buying a ticket you are deemed to have evaded payment. Have you offered Merseyrail the £125? Apologising for being late and sending the the photo of the closed office at Hunts Cross?

 

[Jellyman862]

As soon as you left the shop without buying a ticket you are deemed to have evaded payment. Have you offered Merseyrail the £125? Apologising for being late and sending the the photo of the closed office at Hunts Cross?

They say it’s charged under the byelaw of 18.2 which states it doesn’t apply if the beginning of the journey dosent have any means of buying a ticket so I was emailing them asking about this and they were replying once every couple days so I said can I have an extension but they said it’s filed in court

 

[JBuchananGB]

The official at Liverpool Central accepted your statement that there was no ticket purchasing facilities at your point of origin. You’ve used that up. You are deemed to have evaded the fare by going into the ticket office and coming out without buying a ticket. You then missed the chance for an out of court settlement. The least worst option now is plead guilty and take whatever penalty the court decides.

 

[Jellyman862]

The official at Liverpool Central accepted your statement that there was no ticket purchasing facilities at your point of origin. You’ve used that up. You are deemed to have evaded the fare by going into the ticket office and coming out without buying a ticket. You then missed the chance for an out of court settlement. The least worst option now is plead guilty and take whatever penalty the court decides.

But how can they charge me under section 18.2 when it doesn’t apply to me they haven’t charged me with anything else when I asked and on the letter I can’t afford the court costs will the courts not see that at most it’s a penalty fair not the 18.2 offence it was only a £4.15 ticket

But how can they charge me under section 18.2 when it doesn’t apply to me they haven’t charged me with anything else when I asked and on the letter I can’t afford the court costs will the courts not see that at most it’s a penalty fair not the 18.2 offence it was only a £4.15 ticket

The official at Liverpool Central accepted your statement that there was no ticket purchasing facilities at your point of origin. You’ve used that up. You are deemed to have evaded the fare by going into the ticket office and coming out without buying a ticket. You then missed the chance for an out of court settlement. The least worst option now is plead guilty and take whatever penalty the court decides.

The official at the station was never informed of this which is why he tried to use 18.2 I assume

 

[AdamWW]

The official at Liverpool Central accepted your statement that there was no ticket purchasing facilities at your point of origin. You’ve used that up. You are deemed to have evaded the fare by going into the ticket office and coming out without buying a ticket. You then missed the chance for an out of court settlement. The least worst option now is plead guilty and take whatever penalty the court decides.

The copy I've found of the bylaws says very clearly:

No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if: (i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, he began his journey

I don't see any scope there for arguing somehow that one can "use up" this defence by walking past a ticket office.

Perhaps some other offence has been committed - but the accusation here is under bylaw 18.

Your understanding of Byelaw 18.3 is correct but I’m not convinced it still applies after you have arrived at your destination if that has an open ticket office but you still don’t buy a ticket. Others disagree.

To prevent a repeat of the same argument you might like to read this thread which is an almost identical situation to yours.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/fined-by-merseyrail-as-i-had-“come-too-far”-without-a-ticket-should-i-fight-it.262348/

While, as is the tendency here, the thread you refer to wandered about with much discussion over what the OP there could or should have done and what law they could have been charged under, nobody produced a convincing explanation of how bylaw 18 could apply.

Prosecutions have to be against the law as written. It works both ways. The railway gets to prosecute you if your phone battery dies and you can't show your ticket because the law says that's a criminal offence. They shouldn't get to prosecute you if you have a valid defence by saying "Ah but you should have done this though and it looks as if you weren't going to buy a ticket".

 

[Bertie the bus]

While, as is the tendency here, the thread you refer to wandered about with much discussion over what the OP there could or should have done and what law they could have been charged under, nobody produced a convincing explanation of how bylaw 18 could apply.

Prosecutions have to be against the law as written. It works both ways. The railway gets to prosecute you if your phone battery dies and you can't show your ticket because the law says that's a criminal offence. They shouldn't get to prosecute you if you have a valid defence by saying "Ah but you should have done this though and it looks as if you weren't going to buy a ticket".

The OP states they have already used that argument with Merseyrail and all it has got them is a day in court.

It is for the court to decide whether 18.3 applies in this case or not. If the OP pleads not guilty and posts the outcome on here we will have an unambiguous answer to the question as to whether 18.3 applies or not. Until that happens I can't see any point whatsoever in continuing the debate.

 

[Haywain]

If the OP pleads not guilty and posts the outcome on here we will have an unambiguous answer to the question as to whether 18.3 applies or not.

No, we won't - we will have an answer as to whether it applies in the OP's case and nothing more. The magistrates court cannot set a precedent for other cases and therefore ambiguity will remain.

For the OP, all I can say on this is that if you want to argue your case on a point if law you would be well advised to engage the services of a legal professional for that purpose.

 

[sansyy]

For me I had this happen at Moorfields when the ticket office was changing shifts at Rock Ferry and I did the same thing, was guided to the ticket machine and it was out of service and then walked over to the shop opposite it. As long as you didn't leave the small area where the machine and office lies I can't see how fare was evaded. Unless you left the guards view and was then pulled up when approached which could be seen as fare evading.

 

[Starmill]

You’ve used that up. You are deemed to have evaded the fare by going into the ticket office and coming out without buying a ticket.

Honestly this sounds like something you've just made up to me.

 

[Djgr]

I am lost here. Surely the "shop" aka the ticket office at Liverpool Central had at least one human selling tickets?

 

[peterblue]

I am lost here. Surely the "shop" aka the ticket office at Liverpool Central had at least one human selling tickets?

It does. The people at the checkout can also sell tickets.

OP decided to walk past this.

 

[kristiang85]

It does. The people at the checkout can also sell tickets.

OP decided to walk past this.

Maybe they weren't aware they could buy them from the shop checkout? If someone points you in a certain direction to buy a ticket and you see a machine you assume they are pointing that. If it's not working, then you look for a ticket office which is typically a glass window saying "tickets", not a counter in a shop, so many might walk past this option whilst looking for what they think is a ticket office.

(I haven't been to Liverpool Central in years so I could be wrong here in my assumption of what it looks like, but it does feel like a bit of a trap for an unwitting irregular traveller there).

 

[Starmill]

Maybe they weren't aware they could buy them from the shop checkout? If someone points you in a certain direction to buy a ticket and you see a machine you assume they are pointing that. If it's not working, then you look for a ticket office which is typically a glass window saying "tickets", not a counter in a shop, so many might walk past this option whilst looking for what they think is a ticket office.

(I haven't been to Liverpool Central in years so I could be wrong here in my assumption of what it looks like, but it does feel like a bit of a trap for an unwitting irregular traveller there).

It's not at all obvious that a shop counter has ticket sales available it has to be said, despite the attempt to make signage about it.

 

[Titfield]

I think the problem here in giving advice to the Op is that so far no forum member replying is able to state precisely what would happen in court.

We do not know if the Magistrates would say for example "The charge is under section 18.2, based on the evidence supplied the defendant is not in breach of section 18.2 and therefore case dismissed" or would the Prosecutor say "A mistake has been made in the section quoted in the charge. Section xx.xx applies as he failed to purchase a ticket on arrival and therefore we submit he is guilty of an offence under that section"? Or would the Prosecutor ask for the case to be adjourned whilst a corrected charge? was issued?

We do not know how and under what circumstances a procedural error would result in the case being dismissed or the error being corrected and the defendant being found guilty.

I rather think the OP is in trouble because when he found the machine in the shop not working (a) he failed to take a picture of it as evidence (b) he didnt ask the shop staff.
The reason I say this is that if the shop staff do not have responsibility for the machine it normally has a notice on it saying something like If this machine is faulty the shop staff can not assist. Ring this number instead

It also seems to me to be a bit odd that he knew there was a ticket machine in the shop but didnt know where the ticket office was? Was he directed there by a member of staff. If he was why didnt he go straight back to them (instead of "wandering around") and say the machine is out of order what do I do?

I may be reading to much into this but again we have behaviours that can be interpreted two ways: 1) the innocent mistake 2) the deliberate action having the innocent mistake as a defence if caught.

Could the Op ask the TOC to withdraw the charge if he paid an out of court settlement plus the fare avoided etc. I just rather think that the more likely outcome of going to court is being found guilty with all the costs that entails. He may be found not guilty with legal representation but that could be equally costly.

 

[Starmill]

I think the problem here in giving advice to the Op is that so far no forum member replying is able to state precisely what would happen in court.

We do not know if the Magistrates would say for example "The charge is under section 18.2, based on the evidence supplied the defendant is not in breach of section 18.2 and therefore case dismissed" or would the Prosecutor say "A mistake has been made in the section quoted in the charge. Section xx.xx applies as he failed to purchase a ticket on arrival and therefore we submit he is guilty of an offence under that section"? Or would the Prosecutor ask for the case to be adjourned whilst a corrected charge? was issued?

I don't really think anyone would be able to pre-judge this kind of thing reliably.

 

[WesternLancer]

It does. The people at the checkout can also sell tickets.

OP decided to walk past this.

I think OP says they thought they could only get them from the machine in / near the shop which was not working. Did not realize the retail counter was also a ticket counter.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

It also seems to me to be a bit odd that he knew there was a ticket machine in the shop but didnt know where the ticket office was? Was he directed there by a member of staff. If he was why didnt he go straight back to them (instead of "wandering around") and say the machine is out of order what do I do?

While I only live a few miles up the road, it's a long time since I have been into the shop/ticket office at Liverpool Central. Could someone with more recent knowledge remind us of the layout please? In particular, ticket machine in relation to counter.

For the OP - I think I agree that byelaw 18.3 blocks the byelaw 18.2 charge, particularly because you have evidence of the office at Hunts Cross being closed. But I also agree that we don't really know court procedure - so if you took it to court, it might help to employ a lawyer. But that won't be cheap.

If you are prepared to pay the penalty that you are out of time for, might it be worth trying to get Merseyrail to compromise? I'm thinking writing to them very politely, explaining
- you are sorry that you didn't reply earlier to their offer of a £125 settlement as you were out of the country for a job interview
- you note that they have started a prosecution under byelaw 18.2
- you would draw their attention to byelaw 18.3(ii) which blocks this prosecution if there was a notice at the starting station permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket
- you have evidence of such a notice and will be showing that evidence to the magistrates
- <edit> don't say this bit, but in the above you are giving the message that Merseyrail trying to prosecute you will be messy, time consuming and expensive for them</edit>
- so in the circumstances you would like to ask if the opportunity to pay the £125 settlement could be reinstated.

This isn't a perfect solution - arguably you should only be paying the train fare that is due. But you might get Merseyrail to agree to something like this. If you do want to go down this road, then there will be people here who can help you word the letter.

 

[peterblue]

I think OP says they thought they could only get them from the machine in / near the shop which was not working. Did not realize the retail counter was also a ticket counter.

That's true, it's not the most obvious thing if you are not familiar with the area.

 

[AdamWW]

I think the problem here in giving advice to the Op is that so far no forum member replying is able to state precisely what would happen in court.

We do not know if the Magistrates would say for example "The charge is under section 18.2, based on the evidence supplied the defendant is not in breach of section 18.2 and therefore case dismissed" or would the Prosecutor say "A mistake has been made in the section quoted in the charge. Section xx.xx applies as he failed to purchase a ticket on arrival and therefore we submit he is guilty of an offence under that section"? Or would the Prosecutor ask for the case to be adjourned whilst a corrected charge? was issued?

We do not know how and under what circumstances a procedural error would result in the case being dismissed or the error being corrected and the defendant being found guilty.

Of course nobody can be sure what will happen in court.

But surely if someone is being tried for a particular offence, the prosecution can't just turn up on the day and say "Oops, sorry, put the wrong thing down, we actually meant to prosecute for an entirely different offence?"

It's more than a mere procedural error. The point of a trail is to decide whether someone is guilty of a very specific offence, not whether more generally they did something wrong or not.

Apart from anything else, how could anyone prepare their defence if they couldn't be sure till they got to court what they were actually going to be tried for?

I'm pretty sure the English legal system does not function like this. But there will be those who can comment with more authority.

 

[Titfield]

Of course nobody can be sure what will happen in court.

But surely if someone is being tried for a particular offence, the prosecution can't just turn up on the day and say "Oops, sorry, put the wrong thing down, we actually meant to prosecute for an entirely different offence?"

It's more than a mere procedural error. The point of a trail is to decide whether someone is guilty of a very specific offence, not whether more generally they did something wrong or not.

Apart from anything else, how could anyone prepare their defence if they couldn't be sure till they got to court what they were actually going to be tried for?

I'm pretty sure the English legal system does not function like this. But there will be those who can comment with more authority.

Yes obviously we do not know but, and perhaps I should have made this clearer, it is one thing to be say charged with trespass and it is then upped to burglary compared with being charged under section xxxx not having a valid ticket and then changed to section yyyy travelling with out intending to pay.

I think I am safe in saying that Magistrates do not like court time being wasted. Where a substitute charge is requested, if otherwise the facts of the case remain the same and the penalty is the same then there must be some form of procedure by which the case would proceed even if it requires the defendant being asked if he was prepared to accept that change with a short adjournment whilst he may consider it.

I consider the advice given by @Fawkes Cat in post 22 the course to follow.

 

[Puffing Devil]

An alternative charge can simply be put to the defendant when they attend court to answer the original charge. Additions and deletions to charges are pretty common and are part and parcel of the day's work.

The prosecutor may withdraw the Byelaws 18.2 and substitute it for another. However, in this case, the only option would be S5.3(a) of the Regulation of Railways Act: "Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof;". 5.1 and 5.2 would fail as the OP provided a valid name and address.

That would then hinge on "intent". Given that the OP headed into the shop, found a non-working machine and headed out to find another means to pay, I say that would not show intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

Personally, I would be happy to run this to court - though I know the process. The OP may want to get some legal advice: a suitable letter from a Solicitor may provoke a change of heart from Miseryrail.

Of course nobody can be sure what will happen in court.

But surely if someone is being tried for a particular offence, the prosecution can't just turn up on the day and say "Oops, sorry, put the wrong thing down, we actually meant to prosecute for an entirely different offence?"

It's more than a mere procedural error. The point of a trail is to decide whether someone is guilty of a very specific offence, not whether more generally they did something wrong or not.

Apart from anything else, how could anyone prepare their defence if they couldn't be sure till they got to court what they were actually going to be tried for?

I'm pretty sure the English legal system does not function like this. But there will be those who can comment with more authority.

A quick primer on Magistrate's courts.

You will be summoned to a court hearing if you're suspected of committing an offence and the prosecutor believes there is enough evidence to convict. At that hearing, you enter your "not guilty" plea, and the court gets to work on setting a date for your trial - either in the magistrates court or in the Crown Court. Evidence, witnesses and a skeleton defence are all discussed and pre-trial paperwork is completed. You go away and prepare for trial. You cannot be ambushed on the trial date with a new set of charges.

For some minor cases, such as Railway and Traffic matters, you may be able to plead guilty and deal with the matter without attending. If you plead not guilty on paper, you'll be invited to a physical court to enter the plea formally and plan for a trial at a future date, per the above.

 

[John Luxton]

While I only live a few miles up the road, it's a long time since I have been into the shop/ticket office at Liverpool Central. Could someone with more recent knowledge remind us of the layout please? In particular, ticket machine in relation to counter.

It does actually look like a shop with the counter at the inner end. The couple of times I have had to buy a ticket it (outside of concessionary pass times) it is usually staffed by two people.

What I don't understand though is that there is an excess fare window within the gateline which can be accessed easily by the people on the counter.

However, a notice on the window indicates it is now permanantly closed and asks passengers to go into the shop to buy their ticket.

Of course in so doing they have to go through the gateline and will be intercepted for having no ticket.

I could understand that it is probably wasteful to have a third member of staff in the shop - but would it not be possible just to fit a bell to summon attention to someone waiting at the window?

Alternatively use one of the numerous gateline staff to sit there and collect excess fares.

 

[island]

Your understanding of Byelaw 18.3 is correct but I’m not convinced it still applies after you have arrived at your destination if that has an open ticket office but you still don’t buy a ticket.

There is no possible correct interpretation of byelaw 18.3 that can mean the exception ceases to apply when someone meets a ticket office.

The offence committed by passing an open ticket office at the destination without having paid would be a s5 (3) RRA offence.

 

[AdamWW]

There is no possible correct interpretation of byelaw 18.3 that can mean the exception ceases to apply when someone meets a ticket office.

The offence committed by passing an open ticket office at the destination without having paid would be a s5 (3) RRA offence.

But stated above that the TOC can just change the charge from 18.3 to s5(3) in court on the day.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

It does actually look like a shop with the counter at the inner end. The couple of times I have had to buy a ticket it (outside of concessionary pass times) it is usually staffed by two people.

Thanks. Where is the ticket machine?

What I am trying to identify is whether someone who had found the ticket machine would realistically fail to spot the ticket counter/ till.