Bought ticket with trainline app, was unable to collect at station, now facing threat of prosecution

[Bletchleyite]

The OP, in good faith, imagined that having purchased, but not collected, a ticket for the journey and by being let through the gate/barrier at Brighton he was being given authority to travel to St Pancras. But is that actually the case? Can a staff member operating a ticket barrier issue nod-and-wink tickets as they see fit?

It doesn't overly matter if they are authorised to do so or not, that is a staff conduct/disciplinary issue - I suspect a Court would be more interested in whether one could reasonably assume they did or not. And as the purpose of a barrier is to prevent people passing without valid tickets...

(Note: this is worth what you paid for it; don't try using it in Court unless you've sought professional advice)

 

[Silverdale]

That sounds entirely sufficient to me, especially given they were directed towards their train. As for the part about it needing to be written down, you've just made that up

If it isn't written down or documented and traceable, it can't be provided when required.

If it can't be provided when required, it can't fulfill the requirements of NRCOC.

Therefore, the mere acquiescence of a member of TOC staff cannot be "appropriate authority to travel".

QED

 

[robbeech]

It can be provided by the passenger saying “the person at the gateline/ticket office/platform/on twitter* said it was ok”. If that isn’t ideal due to it being open to abuse how is that the passengers problem?

*this gives it in writing but this is often contested by guards and RPIs too.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

If it isn't written down or documented and traceable, it can't be provided when required.

If it can't be provided when required, it can't fulfill the requirements of NRCOC.

Therefore, the mere acquiescence of a member of TOC staff cannot be "appropriate authority to travel".

QED

The NRCoT does not come into this. Byelaw 18(3) state that no person is in breach of Byelaw 18 if
"an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket." It does not specify that such permission must be in writing in order to be valid - the question of the authorisation being in writing only comes into it as strong evidence if the TOC refutes the passenger's claim that permission to travel was received. 'Authorised person' is specifically defined as "a person acting in the course of his duties who is an employee or agent of an Operator". So as the barrier staff were acting in the course of their duties in authorising passengers to travel (or not) when they cannot use the barriers for whatever reason, they are authorised persons and can give permission in the eyes of the Byelaws.

As ever, it is merely a question of proof and believability as to the proof that permission was received. I wholeheartedly agree that OP should do their best to get hold of the CCTV footage of their actions at the ticket machine(s) and at the barriers. I would be happy to help draft a suitable letter to ensure the best chance of obtaining a copy before it is automatically deleted. If OP wishes to do this, they should send off said letter ASAP - the days literally count for this. CCTV footage may be the OP's only chance of a defence if he/she wishes to take this to Court or otherwise 'appeal' it.

 

[yszctqta]

I wholeheartedly agree that OP should do their best to get hold of the CCTV footage of their actions at the ticket machine(s) and at the barriers. I would be happy to help draft a suitable letter to ensure the best chance of obtaining a copy before it is automatically deleted. If OP wishes to do this, they should send off said letter ASAP - the days literally count for this.

Yes absolutely, how should I go about obtaining CCTV footage?

Thanks!!

 

[Starmill]

If it isn't written down or documented and traceable, it can't be provided when required.

If it can't be provided when required, it can't fulfill the requirements of NRCOC.

Therefore, the mere acquiescence of a member of TOC staff cannot be "appropriate authority to travel".

QED

How can a verbal statement not be 'provided when required'? If the railway company chose to authorise passengers' travel verbally, as has happened to me many times, then it's up to them to organise a way of providing it.

Taking the Railway Byelaws and Consumer Rights Act into account I cannot see any other interpretation. Verbal permission is still permission. Just because you don't like that system, doesn't change that.

 

[JN114]

Yes absolutely, how should I go about obtaining CCTV footage?

Thanks!!

You would need to complete a subject access request to the train operator concerned.

https://www.thameslinkrailway.com/terms-of-use/personal-data

I would caution you from previously working in TOC CCTV (not for GTR I might add) that it’s generally only kept for a relatively short period of time; and that any other person captured by the footage will be blurred out for data protection reasons. I’m not convinced it’s going to be anywhere near as helpful as you might think.

But the relevant details are on the page I have linked to. Best of luck.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

If nothing else it will make the Op think twice about buying anything off Trainline

This seems all too common now and people might be persuaded to buy directly from the TOC rather than from third party vendors

 

[Islineclear3_1]

There is a decent case to make that because of technical developments there are now many more good reasons why an honest customer should be able to board a train without a valid ticket in their hand. The Bylaws and NRCOC should probably be updated to reflect these developments.

I agree. The OP paid for his fare so there is no question around avoiding payment

 

[Tetchytyke]

The OP wasn't given authority to travel. He/she was allowed through the gate to board the train to St Pancras.

Sounds like an authority to travel to me.

Authority does not have to be written down.

Otherwise I would agree entirely with Bletchleyite. Unless authority to travel is given in writing, by a named individual, don't assume you have it.

I'd say that was pragmatic advice, but does not change the fact that authority does not have to be written down. Indeed, as another recent thread showed, sometimes GTR will ignore it even when it IS written down.

 

[Tetchytyke]

If it isn't written down or documented and traceable, it can't be provided when required.

If it can't be provided when required, it can't fulfill the requirements of NRCOC.

All of which is irrelevant, because Byelaw 18(3) makes it clear you're not in breach of the law if an authorised person gave you authority to travel without a valid ticket.

ou would need to complete a subject access request to the train operator concerned.

Once again, CCTV does not prove anything (in many cases, the OP won't even be identifiable in the picture!).

 

[furlong]

Write to them, formally advising them that you believe they may be in possession of evidence that might assist your defence against a possible prosecution, being as specific as you reasonably can about the evidence, and putting them on notice to preserve such evidence in case they are required to supply it at a later date.

(The CCTV doesn't need to prove anything, but it might assist the defence - e.g. corroborating the story if the TOC disputes it, identifying the member of staff involved so a witness statement can be taken etc.)

 

[JN114]

Once again, CCTV does not prove anything (in many cases, the OP won't even be identifiable in the picture!).

I thought I had adequately covered this with my advisory paragraph after the link:

I would caution you from previously working in TOC CCTV (not for GTR I might add) that it’s generally only kept for a relatively short period of time; and that any other person captured by the footage will be blurred out for data protection reasons. I’m not convinced it’s going to be anywhere near as helpful as you might think.

The OP asked a specific question for specific advice. That’s the purpose of this part of the forum.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Yes absolutely, how should I go about obtaining CCTV footage?

Thanks!!

As others have linked, you should address your request to Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd., as they are the data controllers of the CCTV systems in operation at Brighton station where you boarded. Though you are under no obligation to submit the request in this way, it would probably be best using their CCTV request forms so that they have all the information they need to process your request before the CCTV gets deleted. Having received a request specifically for CCTV footage (and hopefully just a few days after the event), they could be in some trouble if they did not address it before they knew the CCTV would be deleted, so it's best to send the form off ASAP, being as specific as you can with timings, locations etc. - you don't want them to have to ask you for clarification!

If you send the form off by post then make sure you have evidence of postage - either get a proof of postage receipt (free) at the Post Office or send it by signed-for delivery (though they might reject delivery of such items by policy, whereas they won't reject delivery of normal letters).

 

[sheff1]

The NRCOC is unspecific about what an "appropriate authority to travel" consists of or who can issue it, but it does state that it is something which the customer is able to provide when required in lieu of a valid ticket. Unless it's in writing, or otherwise documented and traceable so that the customer can provide it, it can't fulfill the requirements of the NRCOC. Consequently it's difficult to see how the OP did not break the Bylaw.

The NRCOC were superseded over 18 months ago. The NRCoT, which replaced the NRCOC, contain no statement that the customer has to "provide" anything if they are given permission to travel by an authorised person. The Railway Byelaws also do not contain any such statement.

If it isn't written down or documented and traceable, it can't be provided when required.

If it can't be provided when required, it can't fulfill the requirements of NRCOC.

Provision of something which you have made up is not a requirement of the NRCOC{sic}

 

[yszctqta]

Firstly, thanks so much to everyone who replied – I really appreciate it.

As advised, I'm keeping a detailed account of what happened on Sunday, along with both the ticket and the collection receipt, and a screenshot of the Apple Pay transaction that clearly shows what time the purchase went through. Separately, I've saved screenshots of all the relevant screens from the trainline app, including one showing the version of the app I used. I've also taken a copy of trainline's terms and conditions, which also make no mention to any kind of delay before you can collect at the station.

I'm going to try and obtain CCTV footage from Brighton station. I was wearing a large red backpack, which should make it easier to identify me at least. Whilst I also would like to go back to Brighton station to see if I can find the staff member I spoke to, unfortunately I have no time to do so in the next 2 weeks.

Is it possible to request logs from the ticket machines I used in Brighton? I imagine there is the possibility that the error I saw was logged, along with the ticket collection reference used, which would prove that I tried repeatedly to collect the ticket.

A couple of random thoughts for consideration. I've always known the Trainline to specify that you leave up to two hours to collect tickets the app doesn't appear have the same restriction. That screenshot you provided is very important so keep it safe in case the app design changes. You were at the station 15 minutes before the train departed, why buy online instead of directly from the machine? Are mTickets available for the journey you were making?

I bought the ticket this time using trainline because it offered the cheapest price. When I first arrived at the station, I did try to find the same priced ticket using the ticket machine, but after spending a few minutes struggling with the UX, I figured it would be quicker to just buy through the app and then collect it. trainline didn't offer the option of mobile tickets during my purchase.

I’d like to look into the Trainline issue a little further. Slightly off topic but there a several fairly serious issues with the trainline and their apps at the moment that have the potential to see people being prosecuted and it’s about time they sorted this out and took some responsibility. Could you tell me which version of the app you are using. There appear to be more issues on the iOS version of the app than the android version though sone issues are common to all as they’re an issue on the database rather than app specific.
I’d like to propose that IF the Trainline app does not specify that tickets will not be available for collection until up to a given time after purchase then they are at least partially responsible for this situation arising.

I'm using the iOS version: Blue 47 (18408)

If trainline had made it clear in the app that there might be a delay in being able to pick up, I wouldn't have bought through them. It seems like a serious UX flaw to allow customers to buy a ticket if there is no possibility to collect it in time.

I would caution you from previously working in TOC CCTV (not for GTR I might add) that it’s generally only kept for a relatively short period of time; and that any other person captured by the footage will be blurred out for data protection reasons. I’m not convinced it’s going to be anywhere near as helpful as you might think.

Given that the footage might be considered evidence in a prosecution case, do you think they will consent to not blurring the staff member that I spoke to at the ticket gates?

If you send the form off by post then make sure you have evidence of postage - either get a proof of postage receipt (free) at the Post Office or send it by signed-for delivery (though they might reject delivery of such items by policy, whereas they won't reject delivery of normal letters).

Is there a high chance that they would reject registered delivery?

 

[MikeWh]

I think it's very unlikely they would reject a letter just because a signature was required. I've no idea where FTLO got that idea.

 

[robbeech]

I'm using the iOS version: Blue 47 (18408)

If trainline had made it clear in the app that there might be a delay in being able to pick up, I wouldn't have bought through them. It seems like a serious UX flaw to allow customers to buy a ticket if there is no possibility to collect it in time

Unfortunately this appears common to Trainline at the moment. I’m aware of at least 3 other issues where they are failing to display crucial information. Some of these could cause problems to passengers and cause them to get into legal battles with the toc. This issue you’re having is similar it seems although there is more to it than this.

 

[Silverdale]

Provision of something which you have made up is not a requirement of the NRCOC{sic}

I did not make up the reference which NRCOC and (subsequently NRCoT) make to a customer providing authority to travel. The reference is in relation to making a claim for compensation for delay.

Of course the OP is not making such a claim, but the reference does imply that "authority to travel" is something which the customer is able to provide, when required.

 

[JN114]

Given that the footage might be considered evidence in a prosecution case, do you think they will consent to not blurring the staff member that I spoke to at the ticket gates?

The web link references “any 3rd party” - it does not make clear whether their own staff constitute a 3rd party in this scenario. If they are identifiable in the footage then they would explicitly have to consent to appearing in a copy given to the member of the public. This, principally is why I must stress again while it’s your prerogative to pursue this avenue; I’m not convinced it will be anywhere near as helpful as you may think.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I think it's very unlikely they would reject a letter just because a signature was required. I've no idea where FTLO got that idea.

I have previously sent letters by recorded delivery to companies and had it rejected a fair percentage of the time. Some simply blanket reject recorded delivery - others have an arrangement with the Royal Mail where they pick all such items up at a Post Office at their leisure (and in some cases, a number of days after the guaranteed date of delivery; a refund of the postage isn't much solace in this case). Whilst proof of postage will serve as adequate proof that OP sent the SAR, it is of greater importance that it actually safely arrives and is read soon. Having never sent anything to GTR by post before, I cannot comment as to their efficiency in this regard, and therefore whether it would be better to send it by signed-for or normal post.

unfortunately I have no time to do so in the next 2 weeks.

Alongside the CCTV footage, speaking to the barrier staff and finding out who it was you spoke to seems to be your best hope of a defence to any prosecution. You'll need to weigh the chances of a criminal conviction and fine if you can't prove your account, against the inconvenience or otherwise of ensuring you get to Brighton station before the relevant records of who was working where when (and the relevant staff members' memories of the day) are permanently lost.

 

[DavidGrain]

The Railway employee at the gate in Brighton gave you authority to travel if he let you through the gate. I would quote 'The Rule in Turquand's Case',

A summary from Wikipedia.
Royal British Bank v Turquand (1856) 6 E&B 327 is a UK company law case that held people transacting with companies are entitled to assume that internal company rules are complied with, even if they are not. This "indoor management rule" or the "Rule in Turquand's Case" is applicable in most of the common law world.

 

[najaB]

The Railway employee at the gate in Brighton gave you authority to travel if he let you through the gate. I would quote 'The Rule in Turquand's Case'

Thanks for that reference, I wasn't aware of it. That may prove useful to people finding themselves in the situation that permission appears to have been granted that is later disputed.

 

[Silverdale]

The Railway employee at the gate in Brighton gave you authority to travel if he let you through the gate. I would quote 'The Rule in Turquand's Case',

I suggest that even if he can show he was allowed through the gate, the OP would still be in search of evidence as to why he was allowed through, there being many reasons why the railway employee would allow it, only one of which is to allow a ticketless passenger to board the train and travel to St Pancras.

 

[furlong]

Note that the process I described is quite different from the Subject Access Request others have described. You could do both.

 

[yorkie]

I moved some of the discussion to Verbal instructions given by staff regarding ticketing matters

@yszctqta - let us know if you require any further discussion regarding your specific case (send me a direct message and I will re-open this thread)