Caught Today Using Railcard 30 days expired Chiltern Rail

[Hadders]

They could do that - that’s a risk - but the law there requires intent, which for a recently expired railcard would be very difficult to prove.

The railcard expired over a month earlier, and the OP tells us that 8 or 9 other tickets had been purchased using the railcard discount.

 

[FireAndHope]

The railcard expired over a month earlier, and the OP tells us that 8 or 9 other tickets had been purchased using the railcard discount.

I’m weary of discussing any potential other journeys if it wasn’t brought up in the charge - if they suspected that was the case then why no invite to an interview or why no cover letter asking for more information? The case seems hastily put together in comparison to some of the others I’ve read about on here.

 

[AlterEgo]

I’m weary of discussing any potential other journeys if it wasn’t brought up in the charge - if they suspected that was the case then why no invite to an interview or why no cover letter asking for more information? The case seems hastily put together in comparison to some of the others I’ve read about on here.

What they usually do is attach a SJPN, alongside a cover letter inviting you to discuss historic purchases. It does seem Chiltern have been slapdash recently. As others have said, they may have forgotten to attach the cover letter. I think this is the most likely explanation.

 

[FireAndHope]

What they usually do is attach a SJPN, alongside a cover letter inviting you to discuss historic purchases. It does seem Chiltern have been slapdash recently. As others have said, they may have forgotten to attach the cover letter. I think this is the most likely explanation.

It’s odd. Every other instance seems to have a letter attached. Although, it may help my argument that there has been procedural errors.

 

[AlterEgo]

It’s odd. Every other instance seems to have a letter attached. Although, it may help my argument that there has been procedural errors.

That the company didn’t offer to settle wouldn’t be evidence of a procedural error. There’s no obligation for them to settle, or attempt to settle.

For what it’s worth I’d suggest @island’s advice is well worth listening to, with his caveat that this is a higher risk strategy and I think you would benefit from a solicitor if you chose this route. @Hadders has suggested something lower risk if that’s your appetite. I don’t personally think they have any basis on which to prove intent as per a charge under the Regulation of Railways Act, but that is just my opinion.

 

[FireAndHope]

For what it’s worth I’d suggest @island’s advice is well worth listening to, with his caveat that this is a higher risk strategy and I think you would benefit from a solicitor if you chose this route. @Hadders has suggested something lower risk if that’s your appetite.

I think I could potentially do both. First I try to contact Chiltern myself, beg forgiveness. Then, as a back up, if I can’t settle, work with a solicitor to go down the route laid out by @island. The main thing is no record, i am willing to suffer the monetary cost of settling to avoid that. Although I won’t make any moves before I can consult.

What an agonising situation. Such an obvious unthinking error on my part, the mortifying embarrassment that I could be so foolish to place myself in such a position is almost punishment enough. I just hope I can make it right. Thank you all for the sage advice.

 

[furlong]

Now that I’ve read it again and again - you’re absolutely right. I’ve been charged for allegedly entering a train in a non-compulsory ticket area when I neither 1) entered a train, or 2) was in a non-compulsory ticket area. There’s no case here. Naturally I fear them re-charging me with something else but I could certainly put it to the magistrate that it is impossible for me to have contravened bylaw 18. I’ll dig into it some more.

While a Penalty Fare can be imposed (on the spot - not retrospectively) for being present in a CTA without a valid ticket, the DfT considered that where a passenger had entered a CTA without a ticket but had not actually travelled on a train it would not be appropriate to make available the more serious sanction of a criminal prosecution.

 

[FireAndHope]

the DfT considered that where a passenger had entered a CTA without a ticket but had not actually travelled on a train it would not be appropriate to make available the more serious sanction of a criminal prosecution

Is this in writing anywhere?

 

[furlong]

Is this in writing anywhere?

See https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/railway_regulations
(However, you will note the difficulties the DfT had in answering this FOI request, and I would caution that I don't think all aspects of its responses are completely correct.)

 

[FireAndHope]

where a passenger had entered a CTA without a ticket but had not actually travelled on a train it would not be appropriate to make available the more serious sanction of a criminal prosecution.

Helpful, thank you. I cannot seem to find this exact reference however, although I am sure it is buried somewhere. I think this is good though, I have options.

 

[FenMan]

Going back to the original post, in 50 years of travelling on the trains I've never seen a member of railway staff approaching passengers waiting on a platform and asking to see their tickets.
At the entrance to a platform? Of course, many times.

Perhaps I've lived a sheltered life.

 

[Pushpit]

That the company didn’t offer to settle wouldn’t be evidence of a procedural error. There’s no obligation for them to settle, or attempt to settle.

For what it’s worth I’d suggest @island’s advice is well worth listening to, with his caveat that this is a higher risk strategy and I think you would benefit from a solicitor if you chose this route. @Hadders has suggested something lower risk if that’s your appetite. I don’t personally think they have any basis on which to prove intent as per a charge under the Regulation of Railways Act, but that is just my opinion.

If the absolute priority is not to get a criminal record, and assuming the "interview at Marylebone" letter got mislaid somewhere (or that position is made available to the OP anyway), than I'm sticking to the points in post 14, even if that would gives an element of rough justice. I suspect Chiltern have dashed out a heap of paperwork in a bit of a hurry since some were getting close to 6 months from the incident in question.

 

[island]

While a Penalty Fare can be imposed (on the spot - not retrospectively) for being present in a CTA without a valid ticket, the DfT considered that where a passenger had entered a CTA without a ticket but had not actually travelled on a train it would not be appropriate to make available the more serious sanction of a criminal prosecution.

Is this in writing anywhere?

See https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/railway_regulations
(However, you will note the difficulties the DfT had in answering this FOI request, and I would caution that I don't think all aspects of its responses are completely correct.)

I would alternatively or also suggest reviewing sections 17 and 24 of the National Rail Byelaws. These make it clear that whilst it is an offence to enter/be in a CTA without a ticket, it is an offence for which there is no punishment. But it does render the offender liable to be removed from the railway by an authorised person.

There's also the potential for them to prosecute you under the Regulation of the Railways Act.

The OP could drag out the response long enough to pass the 6 month deadline for a new information to be laid. The existing case was commenced by SJPN, so it is not open for them to substitute a Regulation of Railways Act section 5 offence, as this offence is not SJPN-eligible.

 

[CyrusWuff]

I would alternatively or also suggest reviewing sections 17 and 24 of the National Rail Byelaws. These make it clear that whilst it is an offence to enter/be in a CTA without a ticket, it is an offence for which there is no punishment.

The logic appears to be that CTAs are dealt with under the Penalty Fares Regulations, so they're explicitly excluded from the Byelaw penalties to avoid a double jeopardy situation.

However, the PF regs don't appear to allow for criminal charges in such circumstances either!

 

[FireAndHope]

My goodness. You might be right about this! I am going to write all of this down. And it’s already been 5 and 1/2 months.

Hi guys, I am preparing to lay out the argument for my solicitor (and potentially the magistrate). I have written the below, let me know if it covers everything or if I should add or remove anything - thank you:

——

I make clear that when this incident occurred I had not entered and had not left a train when I was stopped (confirmed by the prosecution witness) - I was still in a position where I could have left the station. I submit to you 1) the railway by-laws https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...ch/2/railwaysbyelaws.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

Here you will see my charge under bylaw 18 “ticketless travel in a non-compulsory ticket area”. However, Marylebone Station is a *compulsory ticket area* - not non-compulsory, as you can see in this document https://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/sites/default/files/files/timetables/Chiltern Penalty Fares.pdf(bottom right). Therefore it would seem to be impossible that I could have breached bylaw 18 as I was not in a non-compulsory ticket area when I was stopped. Both the basis of the charge is wrong and the facts, as I had not entered or left a train and I was not in a ‘non-compulsory ticket area’.

I also direct your attention to sections 17 and 24 of the aforementioned bylaws. These make it clear that whilst it is an offence to be in a Compulsory Ticket Area without a ticket - under these bylaws it is an offence *without* punishment, it merely renders the offender liable to be removed from the railway. Again I refer back to my previous statement that I requested to be allowed to leave, as I had not embarked on my journey.

Offences arising from being in a Compulsory Ticket Area (which Marylebone is) are punishable under the Penalty Fares Regulations, *not* the railways bylaws. However even in this instance, the Penalty Fares Regulations contain no provisions for criminal charges for someone stopped in a CTA *before* embarking on their journey.

Furthermore, I only entered the train *after* I was 1) not allowed to leave the station, 2) not allowed to buy a correct ticket, and 3) told by the attendant that he could validate my current ticket for travel. I believe this would satisfy bylaw 18.3 iii whereby an authorised person gave me permission to travel.

In addition, the charge that I failed to hand over a ticket for inspection also cannot possibly be true given, as per the attendants own statement and the evidentiary record, I did in fact hand over my ticket when asked.

Therefore, given that I was not in a non-compulsory ticket area, and I was not entering or leaving a train when stopped, I submit that I am not guilty of violating bylaw 18 in either charge.

 

[FireAndHope]

Hi guys, if anyone wanted the epilogue: No heroics, no legal showdown. I asked for a settlement and received one. Chiltern got back with additional trips taken while the card was invalid, ultimately the price paid was in the 800 ballpark.

The lesson: check your railcard, get the right ticket, don’t take chances.

 

[AlterEgo]

Hi guys, if anyone wanted the epilogue: No heroics, no legal showdown. I asked for a settlement and received one. Chiltern got back with additional trips taken while the card was invalid, ultimately the price paid was in the 800 ballpark.

The lesson: check your railcard, get the right ticket, don’t take chances.

Thanks for giving us an update, these are always helpful.