Carnet ticket - notice of intent to prosecute

[Comjc2]

Dear members. Just looking for advice. A few weeks ago my partner was travelling from Harpenden to City Thameslink. She was using a carnet ticket for the first time having the week prior just moved to the area. She was waved through the barriers at Harpenden station by staff, and upon asking for assistance at Thameslink station as to what to do with the carnet ticket (didn’t work at the barriers) she was told that as she hadn’t filled in the date, the ticket wasn’t valid. Several tickets were taken off her (we don’t know how many as she wasnt given a receipt or anything), her address taken and now she has received a notice of intention to prosecute. As annoying as it is, we appreciate that indeed the ticket wasn’t validated as no date was on the multiple tickets that were taken by the inspector. In fact she called Thameslink the same day trying to pay the penalty fare that wasn’t offer by the aggressive and rude inspector. Question, does anyone have a reply template ? As mentioned, as petty and annoying as this is ; she doesn’t intend to contest; more we re just looking to settle the matter as best (and cheaply) as possible

 

[furlong]

When did she buy the tickets relative to when she was caught - how many days in between?
How did she buy them and what instructions was she given at that time about how to use them?

 

[Comjc2]

Hi Furlong

I actually bought the tickets on credit card. Then we went on holiday for a week. So the first time the pack was used a whole was about 9 days after purchase.

 

[some bloke]

The notice of intention to prosecute doesn't necessarily mean they will, rather than agree an out-of-court settlement. Your partner can keep trying for a settlement right up until the case is called in court (including by talking to the prosecutor beforehand in the court building).

What was the reason she didn't write the date?

Does the notice say what allegation they are considering? It may be helpful if you could upload a photo of it with identifying details removed. If it mentions "intent to avoid a fare", it seems she isn't guilty of that.

How long have they given your partner to reply?

The confiscation of other tickets might provide grounds for a separate complaint.

does anyone have a reply template ?

If you post a reply on here, people can comment. The reply should be concise.
As well as brief mentions of individual factors such as why she didn't fill it in, just moved to the area, had not used undated carnet tickets before (or carnet tickets at all):

1. Express a sincere apology to the company and their staff for your actions, and recognise that your failure to pay your correct fare before travelling is wrong.
2. Recognise that fare evasion is a serious matter costing the rail industry huge sums annually
3. If this is the first time that you have been spoken to by a rail company about a ticketing issue, say so and ask if the matter might be resolved by an administrative disposal rather than prosecution
4. Offer to pay the fare due and all of the company's reasonably incurred costs in dealing with this matter
5. If you have no past history of any similar matters, say so and give a written undertaking not to travel without a valid ticket in future.

She could if possible include evidence of the credit card purchase, of having just moved, something indicating the dates of the holiday, and/or indicating that this was the first time for this journey (such as starting a job).

 

[swt_passenger]

Dear members. Just looking for advice. A few weeks ago my partner was travelling from Harpenden to City Thameslink. She was using a carnet ticket for the first time having the week prior just moved to the area. She was waved through the barriers at Harpenden station by staff, and upon asking for assistance at Thameslink station as to what to do with the carnet ticket (didn’t work at the barriers) she was told that as she hadn’t filled in the date, the ticket wasn’t valid. Several tickets were taken off her (we don’t know how many as she wasnt given a receipt or anything), her address taken and now she has received a notice of intention to prosecute. As annoying as it is, we appreciate that indeed the ticket wasn’t validated as no date was on the multiple tickets that were taken by the inspector. In fact she called Thameslink the same day trying to pay the penalty fare that wasn’t offer by the aggressive and rude inspector. Question, does anyone have a reply template ? As mentioned, as petty and annoying as this is ; she doesn’t intend to contest; more we re just looking to settle the matter as best (and cheaply) as possible

Please realise that a penalty fare is not an entitlement, it an option they have, but you cannot try and pay one that doesn’t exist. You need to put that to one side.

 

[Comjc2]

 

[Comjc2]

Many thanks for all the comments

Wording on the reverse. On the 4th February did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway and upon inspection at City Thameslink did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel

 

[Comjc2]

In reply to comment as to why the date wasn’t filled in. She didn’t know it had to be filled in, thus she sort help from a staff member who unfortunately did not want to be helpful.

 

[Hadders]

I would reply saying that it was not made clear that you had to fill in the date when you bought the tickets (didn’t they used to issue a leaflet when buying carnets?)

You might also want to say that you approached the member of staff for assistance and that you now realise that the date has to be completed.

You might also want to apologise for the incident, and say that you hope that the matter can be settled without the need to go to court and you would be willing to pay the train company’s administrative costs in dealing with this matter.

Keep the reply short and concise, don’t give a sob story - they’ll have heard it all before.

Hopefully they will offer you an out of court settlement. The sum requested can vary but expect it to be around £100.

 

[30907]

I would reply saying that it was not made clear that you had to fill in the date when you bought the tickets (didn’t they used to issue a leaflet when buying carnets?)

Before making such a claim, I would re-run the booking process and check what information is offered before/at time of purchase. Perhaps there was relevant information, but you thought it too blindingly obvious to need to pass it on to yiur partner?
(I am not familiar with these particular tickets, other from their regular appearance on this forum when the date boxes have allegedly been misused. I don't think we have previously heard from someone claiming not to have known how to use them.)

 

[Saperstein]

All thesse Carnet incidents would so easily be avoided if GTR would put the things on the key smart card.

 

[some bloke]

Before making such a claim, I would re-run the booking process and check what information is offered before/at time of purchase.

Agreed. If your partner is going to make a factual claim, she needs to be sure it's well supported.

Wording on the reverse. On the 4th February did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway and upon inspection at City Thameslink did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel

That relates to an offence under Byelaw 18:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/railway-byelaws
If the paperwork doesn't mention intent to avoid a fare, that's good. In her communications she needs to bear in mind that she's automatically guilty of the criminal offence under the byelaw (I'm not saying it's right, but it's the law) if she had no valid ticket when she boarded (and the exceptions in the byelaw don't apply). It's a bit like a speeding ticket, where someone can't get out of it by saying they weren't watching the speedometer.

She didn’t know it had to be filled in, thus she sort help from a staff member

She can explain briefly how she didn't know it had to be filled in. The hope would be that they might have some sympathy for her as she'd just moved, and she and you may have had other things on your minds. She needs to be precise: the reason she asked for help seems to be that she couldn't get through the barriers, rather than that she didn't know the ticket had to be filled in, so that part could be left out.

Others can comment on the likely cost of a settlement compared to court; even though the byelaw offence is relatively trivial your partner might think avoiding the conviction is important anyway.

 

[some bloke]

Looking at this web page, I'm surprised it doesn't say right at the start that carnet tickets have to be dated. If appropriate your partner might contact Thameslink management about this - it doesn't mean she's innocent of the byelaw offence, but at some point management's response may be useful.

https://www.thameslinkrailway.com/tickets/ticket-types-explained/carnet-tickets

What information about how to use the tickets did she and you see beforehand, in the process of booking and elsewhere?

If there's a general issue about the adequacy of this information, perhaps Transport Focus would be more interested in your case.
https://www.transportfocus.org.uk/contact/general

They sometimes act when prosecution is threatened:
"CrossCountry accepted the evidence from TF, so TIL withdrew the matter."
https://www.railfuture.org.uk/DL2027
"TF contacted the Rail Delivery Group. ...GWR’s prosecutions team accepted the evidence and closed the case."
https://www.railfuture.org.uk/DL2184

 

[Western Sunset]

The only place I can find where it actually mentions dating them is by clicking the "terms and conditions" box towards the bottom of the page. This leads to the National Rail Enquiries website, where (again) at the bottom of the page it states that " To use a ticket, fill in the travel date in black permanent ink before you start your journey".

Nothing is highlighted or in bold type to stress this important point.

 

[30907]

The only place I can find where it actually mentions dating them is by clicking the "terms and conditions" box towards the bottom of the page. This leads to the National Rail Enquiries website, where (again) at the bottom of the page it states that " To use a ticket, fill in the travel date in black permanent ink before you start your journey".

Nothing is highlighted or in bold type to stress this important point.

It shows if you tap on the prominent ? next to the "select this fare" button.
I haven't seen the specific ticket type so don't know what it says against the date box.

 

[Western Sunset]

Sorry for being dense, but I can't see a "Select this fare" button on the Thameslink page.

 

[some bloke]

Do the tickets say "enter date on use"? If so, it might be harder to argue that it was reasonable for her not to know.

https://twitter.com/canary_kay/status/999597263289831424

 

[30907]

Sorry for being dense, but I can't see a "Select this fare" button on the Thameslink page.

Sorry, didn't explain well and can't link it ATM. It appears against the ticket type and each of the trains you can select

 

[Western Sunset]

Thanks Dulwich (if I may be familiar.....).

 

[some bloke]

This is the image at

https://twitter.com/canary_kay/status/999597263289831424

 

[[.n]]

I can actually see that carnet as quite confusing to a casual user with no real understanding of the importance of the box that you as the passenger have to fill in.

The printed parts seem to unequivocally state that the ticket is valid for 3 months from 15 May 18 until 14 Aug 18 - not just ONCE during this time period.

I would be quite happy to assume that the date box is some kind of "official use" box for a guard or similar to fill in, in the same way that they could (but never do) fill in the box on the back of tickets.

 

[SteveM70]

I know the physical size of the ticket imposes constraints on what can be printed on it, but surely it’s common sense for it to make clear that the passenger is to complete the date, and remove the risk of it being interpreted as being for railway staff to complete?

 

[Western Sunset]

Something like "Enter date before you travel"

 

[furlong]

That is an old picture so it's for the OP to say if the new ones still have the same problems or not, but that says "on use" not "before use" and doesn't say whether the user or the railway fills it in. It also says it is valid for 3 months and the word 'single' is ambiguous - for a single passenger? The boxes also look to be impossibly small, given the nature of the ticket surface. The OP didn't answer my question - but the key here ought to be for the company to be able to demonsrate that the contractual terms it desires to impose regarding validity are enforceable and reasonable and should have been understood and remembered by a first-time user, and that nothing the company did was materially misleading.

 

[some bloke]

the key here ought to be for the company to be able to demonsrate that the contractual terms it desires to impose regarding validity are enforceable and reasonable and should have been understood and remembered by a first-time user, and that nothing the company did was materially misleading.

Yes, and this is perhaps worth adding: Consumer law says that where there's doubt about the meaning of a term in a contract, the interpretation to be followed is that which favours the consumer.

But if @Comjc2's partner goes down that route, wouldn't it involve persuading GTR or magistrates that undated carnet tickets are valid, and isn't it likely that both would not want to come to that judgement themselves rather than leave it to a higher court?

 

[30907]

While there is perhaps ambiguity as to who should fill in the boxes, and even when, I don't think that extends to whether.

 

[Brissle Girl]

To my mind the instruction “Enter date on use” is clear. “On use” is a shorter form of “when you use it” which given the space available would seem reasonable.

Use of the ticket clearly commences when you pass a gate line or at the most charitable interpretation when you board the train, and so if you are travelling and haven’t entered the date you haven’t complied.

 

[kristiang85]

I think it is natural to think for people who aren't used to the system would think that this is something for the guard to fill in - after all, there are so many rules and regulations on the railways, it could be reasonable that someone thinks that a passenger writing on the ticket would be seen as 'unofficial'.

Hopefully if she can demonstrate that they had recently moved there, has not purchased carnets before, and has a history of always paying for tickets, this would be looked upon sympathetically.

 

[packermac]

I think it is natural to think for people who aren't used to the system would think that this is something for the guard to fill in - after all, there are so many rules and regulations on the railways, it could be reasonable that someone thinks that a passenger writing on the ticket would be seen as 'unofficial'.

Hopefully if she can demonstrate that they had recently moved there, has not purchased carnets before, and has a history of always paying for tickets, this would be looked upon sympathetically.

I agree it should give some clear indication that this is required to be done by the passenger before use. Otherwise most people would believe that writing on a ticket is actually defacing it.
I too following the buy carnet link seemed to be only offered regular tickets. Pretty poor offering all round really.

 

[30907]

I too following the buy carnet link seemed to be only offered regular tickets. Pretty poor offering all round really.

Click on "show all tickets" and they appear...