Confiscation of ticket? Is this legal?

Discussion in 'Fares Advice & Policy' started by Pipps, 18 Dec 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Old Timer

    Old Timer Established Member

    Messages:
    3,704
    Joined:
    24 Aug 2009
    Location:
    On a plane somewhere at 35,000
    According to the FGW website you apparantly only pay if you travel to destination. Other TOCs LM/FCC/SWT for example operate differently




    You are assuming that there was no reason for its withdrawal. AS others have said there is more to this story than we have the facts to.

    As far as Contractual Obligations are concerned they work both ways. Break YOUR Contractrual obligations and all bets are off so to speak. You agree to this when you get your Railcard and when you travel.
     
    Last edited: 18 Dec 2009
  2. ralphchadkirk

    ralphchadkirk Established Member

    Messages:
    5,764
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2008
    Location:
    Essex
    I shall check tomorrow with an RPI, but I'm pretty sure you can be penalty fared - as has been pointed out by Old Timer.
     
  3. yorkie

    yorkie Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    44,221
    Joined:
    6 Jun 2005
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    It doesn't take much research to find out this is not the case. It's cropped up many times on this forum before!

    12 (a) clearly states an excess will be charged.
     
  4. Old Timer

    Old Timer Established Member

    Messages:
    3,704
    Joined:
    24 Aug 2009
    Location:
    On a plane somewhere at 35,000
    It also states
    or
    (b) in the case of some types of discounted tickets (as indicated in the notices and publications) the relevant parts of Condition 2 or 4 will apply.
    4 being a Penalty Fare. If you look on the LM website for example, then the PF is automatic once you have progressed through the barrier line.

    Your comment should not have left that out.
     
  5. First class

    First class Established Member

    Messages:
    2,733
    Joined:
    9 Aug 2008
    Penalty Fare Rules 2002
    http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/pf/annexapenaltyfaresrules2002

    Section 7

    >6. An authorised collector must not charge a penalty fare to a person whose ticket is not valid only because of a published restriction, as described in condition 12 of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.


    Reference to Section 12 NRCoC:

    12. Restrictions on when you can travel
    Restrictions apply to the use of some tickets (including those bought with a Railcard) such
    as the dates, days, and times when you can use them, and the trains in which they can
    be used. These restrictions are set out in the notices and other publications of the Train
    Companies whose trains you are entitled to use. If a restriction applies and the ticket you
    are using is not valid for the train you are travelling in, then:
    (a) you will be liable to pay an excess fare (the difference between the price
    paid for the ticket you hold and the price of the lowest priced ticket
    available for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel in that
    train for the journey shown on the ticket); or
    (b) in the case of some types of discounted tickets (as indicated in the notices and
    publications) the relevant parts of Condition 2 or 4 will apply.

    A Penalty Fare CANNOT be charged for a time restriction or route violation. However, they should be charged the FULL OPEN STANDARD SINGLE FARE, (or return if requested).
     
  6. Old Timer

    Old Timer Established Member

    Messages:
    3,704
    Joined:
    24 Aug 2009
    Location:
    On a plane somewhere at 35,000
    Both are in conflict then.

    Obviously various public bodies do not communicate with one another, surprise, surprise :roll::roll::roll:

    Typical of the amateurs we now have involved in the running of the Railway, but not untypical of the usual Civil Service incompetence we have learnt to expect.
     
  7. tony_mac

    tony_mac Established Member

    Messages:
    3,597
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2009
    Location:
    Liverpool
    I am pretty sure that 12 b), which only applies to 'some types of discounted tickets', probably means Advance tickets, just to make it completely clear that travelling on the wrong train can lead to a penalty fare.

    Otherwise someone using an Advance ticket on the wrong train could point to 12 a) and say that they can't get a penalty fare.

    I don't think that's a conflict al all, and is actually a clarification.
     
  8. Old Timer

    Old Timer Established Member

    Messages:
    3,704
    Joined:
    24 Aug 2009
    Location:
    On a plane somewhere at 35,000
    I disagree.

    If there are two or more explanations then it requires clarification, unless of course the TOC Scheme Rules arrangements over ride 7.6.

    Either way the rules should be quite clear to everybody.

    Under BR everything was quite clear but then they employed people who knew their business and of course there was no interference from outside bodies.
     
  9. tony_mac

    tony_mac Established Member

    Messages:
    3,597
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2009
    Location:
    Liverpool
    I think they are clear to everybody else ;)
     
  10. Old Timer

    Old Timer Established Member

    Messages:
    3,704
    Joined:
    24 Aug 2009
    Location:
    On a plane somewhere at 35,000
    In YOUR opinion ?


    You could not even be definite yourself choosing instead to use the phrase "...I am pretty sure...". Hardly a resounding statement of confidence. :) ;)

    I could argue the contrary but what would be the point ?
     
  11. tony_mac

    tony_mac Established Member

    Messages:
    3,597
    Joined:
    25 Feb 2009
    Location:
    Liverpool
    yes, it was mostly meant humorously!

    The thing 'I am pretty sure' about was 'some types of discounted tickets' means exactly 'Advance tickets', but, then I thought that was clear as well.

    I agree that there are many confusing, contradictory and ambiguous statements in many railway documents that I have seen. I didn't actually think that this was one of them.

    So, do you think that off-peak tickets are 'some types of discounted tickets (as indicated in the notices and publications) to which condition 4 applies?
     
  12. Pipps

    Pipps Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2009
    I am very grateful for the incredibly detailed and useful insights concerning the imposition of the Penalty Fare Notice.

    As has already been suggested by more learned members than I, the mish-mash of conflicting contractual terms which we find ourselves attempting to interpret over an event as simple as the issue of a Penalty Fare Notice is something which is surely more complicated than it should be. I would agree that the Unfair Terms (Consumer Contracts) Regulations 2000 should be considered, and I will do so.

    There is also a rule of law known to as contra proferentum. An ambiguous contractual term must always be interpreted against the party which imposed it. For this reason alone, as a matter of principle, I would agree with Old Timer's insightful assertions. Not to mention that his arguments are so far the most convincing.

    There is only one more little detail which may be of interest. The Inspector in fact stamped and 'approved' the off-peak ticket, before then waking-up, changing his mind entirely, and attempting to issue the Penalty Fare Notice in question. Perhaps this is just a little extra insight into what a bad day that poor Inspector must have been having. Does the fact that I was put in possession of a stamped and approved ticket, mean that the subsequent issue of the Penalty Fare Notice would be less than straightforward?

    I would like to reassure everyone that there is nothing else more juicy to this story. I was not rude to the Inspector. I did not even object to the issue of the Penalty Fare Notice. I was traveling on expenses - I didn't mind what the journey cost me. All I objected to, at the end of the interaction, was the undeclared, unadvised and seemingly unjustifiable withdrawal of my valid Rail Card - which appeared to have nothing whatsoever to do with the Penalty Fare Notice in point.
     
    Last edited: 21 Dec 2009
  13. hairyhandedfool

    hairyhandedfool Established Member

    Messages:
    8,838
    Joined:
    14 Apr 2008
    Define a "published restriction" then you have your answer.

    If a "published restriction" is that which is in the NFM/FRPP, no Penalty fare could ever be issued where a ticket is present, which kind of defeats the object of the statement don't you think? Afterall an advance fare is still time restricted, just to a far larger degree.

    If we are not talking about the restrictions in the NFM/FRPP, what are we using to define the term?

    I also throw in for the record the FRPP's exceptions to excess fares rules.....

    The excess fare rules quoted in [the excess fares section] do not apply in the following circumstances:

    1) A penalty fares scheme operates

    2) The train company enforces byelaw 18

    3) Where the train company has issued any local instructions which supersede the rules for excess fares.

    4) Where a train company is at fault (e.g. service disruption)

    5) CIV Regulations......

    So you have to issue an excess with the PF scheme, but the XS fare rules don't apply because a PF scheme operates!!!!!! Or perhaps because they enforce byelaw 18 or have issued local instructions.

    I was very firmly of Old Timers belief when I joined this forum (Yorkie may remember that) but now I couldn't say what is what because the rules make little sense to me these days, contradictory at best.

    If I recall correctly, all FCC stations are compulsory ticket areas so Byelaw 18 won't apply, but I can't say for other PF schemes.
     
  14. Pipps

    Pipps Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2009
    Good point! And the answer to this question should be easily determined by reference to the answer to the following question.

    Are the rules concerning 'published restrictions' contained within contractual terms and conditions, or within a statutory instrument of delegated legislation?

    Statute should usually be interpreted purposively, these days. However, a contract doesn't have to make sense or achieve a logical purpose. Contra proferentum
     
  15. Tom C

    Tom C Member

    Messages:
    549
    Joined:
    4 Jul 2005
    A penalty fare cannot be issued against any ticket which is invalid due being off route (i.e Not London) or due a restriction on the ticket type. An excess fare should be issued in all cases. You may issue a penalty fare if you have no ticket at all, you are travelling out of class, travelling beyond the validity of the ticket, travelling on a child ticket when you are not a child or you cannot supply a supporting document (i.e railcards)

    It should be noted that whilst a Penalty fare cannot be issued for routes and restrictions, an MG11 can be.
     
  16. Pipps

    Pipps Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2009
    That is very concise and helpful advice. Thank you!

    So for a ticket which it is alleged should not have been used at a particular time of day, a Penalty Fare Notice cannot be issued, and instead an excess charges notice should have been used?
     
  17. Ferret

    Ferret Established Member

    Messages:
    3,964
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2009
    So, you had an Advance ticket which says "booked train only" on it, and you elected to travel on an earlier service. This means you would've been treated as no ticket held and required to purchase a brand new ticket. I'm afraid there is no contractual ambiguity here - you had a cheap ticket for a specific service and your ticket told you that! Now, were you issued with a penalty fare or an unpaid fares notice? There is a difference....
     
  18. Old Timer

    Old Timer Established Member

    Messages:
    3,704
    Joined:
    24 Aug 2009
    Location:
    On a plane somewhere at 35,000
    Can you just clarify something to an old codger, here.

    LM trains in their signage and on their website state that the PF will be issued if you are found travelling, i.e if you are inside the barrier mine. They do not specify any exclusions. I believe others such as FCC and SWT do similar.

    What is correct ?
     
    Last edited: 19 Dec 2009
  19. jon0844

    jon0844 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    24,115
    Joined:
    1 Feb 2009
    Location:
    UK
    I have read this thread and can only presume there was something wrong/suspicious with the rail card, and on that basis perhaps there are grounds for a penalty fare?

    If you were getting a YPRC discount but the rail card was not valid, your ticket was not valid either - and then it doesn't really matter what train you actually got to the one you were supposed to.

    There has to be something more to this story that we haven't been told about!

    From the way you're asking and then summarising (and obviously picking the bits that support you), I am assuming you're hoping to get something you can quote or present as supporting evidence in court, but nobody on here is a qualified lawyer. It's all opinion or interpretation and won't get you anywhere in front of a magistrate!
     
  20. Pipps

    Pipps Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2009
    Another psychic. How helpful.
     
  21. Ferret

    Ferret Established Member

    Messages:
    3,964
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2009
    I could say the same about not giving us the full story! In your first post you implied that the invalidity of your ticket was open to dispute when it seems to me to be blatantly obvious you were on the wrong train with an Advance ticket. I've challenged you about this and you've declined to respond. Is it any wonder that there is a growing suspicion that you aren't telling us the whole story?
     
    Last edited: 19 Dec 2009
  22. Pipps

    Pipps Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2009
    Clearly there is still very much debate on this thread about the validity of PFNs.

    You psychics seem to enjoy letting your imaginations get the better of you.
     
  23. Ferret

    Ferret Established Member

    Messages:
    3,964
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2009
    And still you haven't answered whether you've been penalty fared or whether you've had an unpaid fares notice!!! Care to stop wasting everybody's time?
     
  24. jon0844

    jon0844 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    24,115
    Joined:
    1 Feb 2009
    Location:
    UK
    What else can you use when the person asking the original question is withholding key information?

    And while I am being 'psychic', I think your attitude to anyone that says something you don't want to hear is starting to explain how the situation was probably played out on the train.

    I never believed in psychics before, but now I am wondering if I have some amazing powers because I now start to 'see' you had an invalid/doctored/in the name of someone else railcard and it's got nothing to do with travelling on an earlier train.

    I also 'see' that you're asking for help to get something you can quote as 'someone within the railway industry said this..' and get off.
     
  25. Pipps

    Pipps Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2009
    What a shame that this thread has descended into baseless accusations.

    How unfortunate that when certain members are faced with a fact-pattern that they cannot understand, they resort to attempting to deny the very facts themselves.

    Gylnn80, Old Timer, Hairyhandedfool, Tom C: I am very grateful for your help in understanding the position concerning Rail Cards in more detail. Thank you for your support.
     
  26. Tom C

    Tom C Member

    Messages:
    549
    Joined:
    4 Jul 2005
    That sounds to me like a "Compulsary Ticket Area" which is what London Underground use where you must have a valid ticket once you pass a point notifying you of a CTA. The only one I definately know of is at Farringdon although I am fairly sure it applies at all LUL stations.

    FCC does NOT have a compulsary ticket area.

    You can be issued with a Penalty Fare if you are in a Compulsary Ticket Area without a valid ticket and this is another reason for being issued with one although in my experience on National Rail it is quite a rare thing although I stand to be corrected.
     
  27. hairyhandedfool

    hairyhandedfool Established Member

    Messages:
    8,838
    Joined:
    14 Apr 2008
    "Eliminate the possible, and whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth"

    The 'Psychics' are picking up on a few comments you have (or have not) made and then they see that you have appeared not to answer their queries. There are three things that stand out to me from your original post.....

    Making the assumption the Inspector was doing his job correctly....

    He should not have issued a UFN unless either there was another issue with the ticket/railcard, or you were unwilling/unable to pay the excess on your ticket to the appropriate single/return fare for that train.

    He would not have walked away with your railcard unless there was something wrong with it or the way it has been used, he should mention why in my eyes, but I don't think he has to.

    I know some people are intimidating by nature, but if it was as you say there was no reason for him to be that way. I also doubt he'd want a physical confrontation infront of a coach load of people.

    So there are three logical conclusions IMO....

    1) You are telling the truth and the Inspector is incapable of doing his job properly or seemingly preys on random people (the Inspector may prey on a select group of people but there is no evidence of that) for no apparent reason (there may actually be a reason, but there is no evidence of one).

    2) He did his job right and you are not telling us something important (even if you deem it not to be.

    3) He was not an Inspector, but infact someone pretending to be one after he stole some uniform and a UFN pad and as a major coincidence, the real Inspector didn't go down the train that day and failed to notice someone impersonating an Inspector on the train.

    The fact that we have only your side of the story and the situation went against you is not in your favour though. I'm not having a go and am not in a position to judge you, but that's just how it looks to me.
     
  28. jon0844

    jon0844 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    24,115
    Joined:
    1 Feb 2009
    Location:
    UK
    When are you going to give ALL of the information?

    You're still cherry picking the answers you want to hear, but people can only comment on what they know - and you're not giving the whole story.
     
  29. Ferret

    Ferret Established Member

    Messages:
    3,964
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2009
    Tbh, this thread has been a load of old tut from the start! I mean, a Guard attacking a customer in a carriage full of people? Talk about professional suicide! It's so unlikely that I'm beginning to question whether the whole thing is just a wind up.
     
  30. Greenback

    Greenback Emeritus Moderator

    Messages:
    15,376
    Joined:
    9 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Llanelli
    There's no doubt that the original post did not contain sufficient information to be able to judge the rights and wrongs of the situation. We were not told what ticket the OP held that was deemed invalid, why it was invalid, or whether an excess was offered. Since then, we have been told that the Unpaid Fare Notice was a Penalty Fare. It also now appears that the ticket was 'approved' before the 'Inspector' decided it wasn;t valid.

    I would still liek to know the type of ticket held, eg the outward portion of a Y-P London - Plymouth Super Off Peak Return or whatever, whether the inspector tried to excess the ticket and the OP did not have the means to pay, what type of railcard was withdrawn, whether it was in the name of the OP and whether any complaint has been made to FGW.

    I know that staff in the ticket office used to withdraw railcards regularly when I was working in the industry. Usually, these were Network Cards that were being misused, for example, someone had borrowed a friend or relatives card and were clearly not the person named on the railcard, but there were other types withdrawn as well. Sadly memory fails me at this point as to what other reasons we would have had to take them away!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page