Court Appearance

[Starmill]

I said ' Did you make any effort to find the guard on the train?'
He said ' No i didnt make any effort ' (this is bcaus im used to guards walking up and down the train for tickets and when they didnt I assumed there wasn't one on board.)

Did you tell them you thought the train was entirely guard-less? That'd be new. Combined with stating your origin as Cardiff, they may have thought you were pretending not to know how to buy a ticket... and hence avoiding the fare?

I dunno, I have never actively tried to seek out a guard before in order to buy a ticket and I don't think this should be the responsibility of the passenger, especially if they are sat in their cubby hole, but in this case, I think asking would be a priority.

 

[cuccir]

I asked Mr XXX where he was traveling from and to?
Mr XXX replied travelling from Treforest to Neath.
...
.......

It would have been about 6pm to 6.30pm and no the ticket office was not open

......

The whole journey was mentioned from Treforest to Neath and they photocopied my ticket from Treforest to Cardiff.

If these three facts are true, then jam1312 is at most guilty of a Bylaw offence, surely? If you're intending to split ticket but can't buy them all on departure, does that count as tickets not being available to purchase - if so he might not even be guilty of a.Bylaw offence? If the guard passed down either train at any point, then the case is more serious, as there wad a clear opportunity to buy the intended tickets.

 

[Flamingo]

A few comments from a Guard who works the Cardiff-Swansea line.
1. The OP was VERY unlucky. On the other 362 days of the year the railway is operating, after 6-7 pm, and all day Sunday, the OP could get off at any ATW station except Cardiff and walk out, as barriers would not be in operation. As a frequent user of this line, the OP would have been aware of that.
2. A guard would have been passing through the Treforrest train. If the OP was on an HST from Cardiff, then it is a lot less likely that a guard would have passed through, but the guard would have been at the buffet. If they were on an ATW service, there is a 90% chance the guard would have at least done a "shout over".
3. There is no excess fares window at Neath, and no ticket offices open after 7pm. Claims thatt "that is what I usually do" should be taken with a bushel of salt.
4. from personal experience, I come across a dozen people a day with the same story as the OP, some with a partial ticket, some with none at all, all ask for a ticket from Cardiff. The general attitude (see note 1) is that if challenged they will pay, otherwise it's a free ride. A significant proportion expect it to be a free ride full stop.

Before people start posting saying that the OP is being wrongfully prosecuted, please take the above points into account. The OP has either been incredibly unlucky, or their regular scam has finally caught up with them. Either way, the prosecution is valid.

 

[ainsworth74]

If you're intending to split ticket but can't buy them all on departure, does that count as tickets not being available to purchase - if so he might not even be guilty of a.Bylaw offence?

It is my understanding that you should buy the tickets to complete your journey at the first opportunity which would have been when the OP changed trains at Cardiff. Their need to make a specific connection for personal reasons does not absolve them of this requirement.

 

[Greenback]

A few comments from a Guard who works the Cardiff-Swansea line.
1. The OP was VERY unlucky. On the other 362 days of the year the railway is operating, after 6-7 pm, and all day Sunday, the OP could get off at any ATW station except Cardiff and walk out, as barriers would not be in operation. As a frequent user of this line, the OP would have been aware of that.

I concur. It's hard to argue otherwise with the final sentence.

2. A guard would have been passing through the Treforrest train. If the OP was on an HST from Cardiff, then it is a lot less likely that a guard would have passed through, but the guard would have been at the buffet. If they were on an ATW service, there is a 90% chance the guard would have at least done a "shout over".

I also agree with all this. In my experience it's very rare for an ATW guard not to go through the train.

3. There is no excess fares window at Neath, and no ticket offices open after 7pm. Claims thatt "that is what I usually do" should be taken with a bushel of salt.

Yes, ther eis no excess ticket office or ticket window at Neath, but the OP is correct to say that ther eis one at Swansea. Therefore, it's possible that the Op has previously traveleld to Swansea as stated, and perhaps at an earlier time, when the barriers and excess office were open.

However the barriers are usually open in Swanse aafter 1930.

4. from personal experience, I come across a dozen people a day with the same story as the OP, some with a partial ticket, some with none at all, all ask for a ticket from Cardiff. The general attitude (see note 1) is that if challenged they will pay, otherwise it's a free ride. A significant proportion expect it to be a free ride full stop.

Obviously, I cannot comment on this, as I am not in the same job as Flamingo!

Before people start posting saying that the OP is being wrongfully prosecuted, please take the above points into account. The OP has either been incredibly unlucky, or their regular scam has finally caught up with them. Either way, the prosecution is valid.

I agree the prosecution is valid.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is my understanding that you should buy the tickets to complete your journey at the first opportunity which would have been when the OP changed trains at Cardiff. Their need to make a specific connection for personal reasons does not absolve them of this requirement.

The OP should have had an opportunity to buy an additional ticket on the first train. Personally, if I had not seen the guard on board, I would have bought one at Cardiff to ensure I wasn't at risk of prosecution, particularly if I was splitting tickets.

In my experience of ATW, it's very rare not to see a guard at all on two seperate services. On a recent trip up the Marches from Swansea, I was very surprised when a guard didn't come around before Bridgend!

 

[cuccir]

The OP has either been incredibly unlucky, or their regular scam has finally caught up with them.

If the OP has lied and has come here to receive advice on a set of circumstances that don't reflect what actually happened, then that's his prerogative: he'll soon find that if he takes the case to court then he'll be found out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is my understanding that you should buy the tickets to complete your journey at the first opportunity which would have been when the OP changed trains at Cardiff. Their need to make a specific connection for personal reasons does not absolve them of this requirement.

Yes, I have to agree that if your ticket was only unavailable because you were intending to split tickets, then this would be the case.

 

[34D]

Yes, I have to agree that if your ticket was only unavailable because you were intending to split tickets, then this would be the case.

We did have a thread on here (journey something like stamford-London, splitting at PBO) where I think the consensus was that one doesn't have to miss a train to visit a ticket office, and that the first opportunity to buy could well be on the second train or even at the destination.

I've no idea whether the OP is genuine or is a serial evader who has been found out for the first time: only their conscience knows.

 

[Rich McLean]

The way I see it, the OP should of got off the train at Cardiff, missed the train to neath, bought a ticket at Cardiff, and caught the next service. A pain I know, but personally, the OP doesn't really have a leg to stand on, and the best he can hope for is an out of court settlement

 

[34D]

The way I see it, the OP should of got off the train at Cardiff, missed the train to neath, bought a ticket at Cardiff, and caught the next service. A pain I know, but personally, the OP doesn't really have a leg to stand on, and the best he can hope for is an out of court settlement

Point one - could HAVE
Point two - do you have a credible source for this assertion, or is it simply your own opinion of what should happen?

 

[yorkie]

Yes, I have to agree that if your ticket was only unavailable because you were intending to split tickets, then this would be the case.

I completely disagree. You have the right to use a combination of tickets as defined in the NRCoC (Condition 19).

If the ticket(s) you wish to purchase are not available from the machine using the intended payment method, then you should buy a ticket that enables you to make part of your journey if you are able to do so, and then you are entitled to the full range on board or at the next opportunity.

It is likely that the OP had an opportunity to buy on board on the train from Treforest but failed to do so, which means the OP is liable for prosecution. The interchange at Cardiff is irrelevant.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The way I see it, the OP should of got off the train at Cardiff, missed the train to neath, bought a ticket at Cardiff, and caught the next service. A pain I know, but personally, the OP doesn't really have a leg to stand on, and the best he can hope for is an out of court settlement

Wrong. The OP was entitled to the full range of tickets on the train from Treforest so should have bought the tickets on board the train. If the guard was unable to sell the tickets for whatever reason then the OP is entitled to buy at the next opportunity. An opportunity does not require missing a train at an interchange station.

 

[cuccir]

Fair enough if this has been established with regards to split ticketing!

 

[yorkie]

Fair enough if this has been established with regards to split ticketing!

It's all covered in the NRCoC:-

19. Using a combination of tickets
You may use two or more tickets for one journey as long as together they cover the entire
journey and one of the following applies:

(a) they are both Zonal Tickets (unless special conditions prohibit their use);

(b) the train you are in calls at a station where you change from one

ticket to another; or

(c) one of the tickets is a Season Ticket (which for this purpose does not include

Season Tickets or travel passes issued on behalf of a passenger transport

executive or local authority) or a leisure travel pass, and the other ticket(s) is/are not.

3. Where the full range of tickets is not available
If you cannot buy an appropriate ticket for the journey you want to make because the
range of tickets that is available at the station from which you intend to start your journey
is restricted, you must buy a ticket or Permit to Travel before you travel that entitles you to
make at least part of the journey. Then you must, as soon as is reasonably practicable, buy
an appropriate ticket to complete your journey. In these circumstances, you only need to pay
the fare that you would have paid if you had bought a ticket immediately before your journey.
The price you will have to pay will be reduced by the amount paid for the ticket or Permit to
Travel.

In this particular case the ticket that you "must buy... before you travel" is the Treforest - Cardiff ticket, and "as soon as is reasonably practicable" would normally be on board the Treforest - Cardiff train, and the "appropriate ticket to complete your journey" would be a Cardiff to Neath ticket.

It's quite straightforward really.

 

[Greenback]

In this instance, the interchange is irrelevant. If the guard did walk through, the OP either did not know they could buy their second ticket on the first train, or did not want to.

But if I was in that position myself and the guard did not appear, i would definitely use the 10 or 11 minute connection time at Cardiff (assuming the train wasn't late) to nip out and buy the second ticket. This avoids the possibility of any confrontation with staff who might want to know how I got to the train without a ticket, and the potential accusations of trying to evade buying a ticket.

If the train was late, I would probably choose to catch the next connection as there are plenty of trains in the early evening, but that would be my choice, and not a requirement.

 

[RJ]

Condition 3 only refers to journeys whereby one ticket is to be used and doesn't state explicitly or implicitly that it applies to journeys where split ticketing is the intended way of paying the fare.

The way I read it, unless you are splitting at a station where you are changing trains, it doesn't apply to split ticketing. There is no bespoke definition in the glossary to suggest that the word "ticket" can be taken as either a singular or plural. This is why I, as a habitual user of split ticketing, more commonly use the term "paid the fare" instead of "bought a ticket," because the latter isn't strictly accurate.

I practice what I preach. On the last occasion I boarded at my usual unstaffed shack in EMT land, I purchased a ticket to next station where the train stopped, instead of the next outhouse on the line. Once on board, I approached the guard ASAP to buy my tickets for the remainder of the journey.

Be wary of using it where a defence may be required.

 

[yorkie]

Condition 3 applies where the "full range" is not available, which was the case at Treforest.

If the full range of tickets had been available then presumably the OP would have bought the tickets required for the journey. The OP only partially complied with Condition 3 as a ticket to Cardiff was bought but it would appear that the other ticket required was not purchased at the first opportunity which was likely on the train from Treforest.

There is nothing to suggest that Condition 3 "does not apply" in certain circumstances, it applies when the full range is not available. Clearly most ticket machines cannot sell the "full range" of tickets (Southern machines are pretty close though).

 

[SWTCommuter]

My interpretation of condition 3 would place an obligation on the OP to buy the second ticket at Cardiff if he was unable buy it on the train from Trefforest.

If the train from Trefforest was late, it might not have been practical, in terms allowing him to catch his preferred connection, but it would have been "reasonably practicable" to buy a ticket and catch the next connection, given the frequency of the service.

 

[maniacmartin]

If the events are as the OP described, then I think it depends on how much interchange time there was at Cardiff. If the OP had allowed the minimum interchange time at Cardiff and going to the ticket office and queuing was likely to make them miss the next train, then I don't think it is "reasonably practicable".

If going to the Cardiff ticket office was unlikely to make them miss their next train, then I would say that it is reasonably practicable to expect them to buy the second ticket there.

I don't think its reasonable for a passenger to have to miss a valid connection because the TOC didn't bother to provide an opportunity to sell the full range of tickets at the start of the journey. If all TOCs' TVMs let you buy tickets from different origin stations, like Southern do, then this situation could have been avoided.

This is, of course, assuming the events transpired as the OP described. If the guard walked through one of the trains, and they didn't take that opportunity to buy the second ticket, then I'd say the prosecution is valid

 

[cuccir]

My interpretation of condition 3 would place an obligation on the OP to buy the second ticket at Cardiff if he was unable buy it on the train from Trefforest.

If the train from Trefforest was late, it might not have been practical, in terms allowing him to catch his preferred connection, but it would have been "reasonably practicable" to buy a ticket and catch the next connection, given the frequency of the service.

Yes but a traveller might have a very good reason for wanting to reach their destination at a certain time, and they shouldn't delay themselves because tickets weren't available to purchase.

To clarify: I was never questioning point 3 in the NRCOC, which is very clear that there's no need to delay yourself to buy tickets if they weren't available at the start of your journey, as long as you buy them at the first opportunity.

My question was whether it had been established that this condition covered you if your intention was to buy one or more tickets for a journey. Yorkie's noting of the phrase "full range" does seem to be important here - clearly if the ticket office is not open, the full range of tickets was not available.

As Greenback has noted, this is all irrelevant if the guard passed through on the Treforest to Cardiff train and Jam1312 did not buy a ticket at that time (presuming the guard was in a position to sell the ticket).

--
Quite a bit of overlap with the above post which wasn't there when I posted this. I think this thread seems to be winding down, unless the OP returns with any further comments...

 

[michael769]

compliance with the NCoC is an entirely civil matter - while non compliance could be used to help establish intent for the purposes of Mens Rea, the OPs guilt or otherwise will be determined based on the courts interpretation of the relevant statute.

In this case the relevant part of 5(3) is, in my opinion, clause 5(3)(b):

5(3)(b)Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

As unlike 5(3)(a) there is no mention of intent for this clause, it is likely to be treated as strict liability. As the OP by his own admission was aware that he had failed to buy a ticket before travelling beyond where he knew his ticket was valid to, I think that the prosecution is in a good position to succeed.

Unlike byelaw 18 I can find no provision of a statutory defense based on not having an opportunity to purchase the ticket - as the OP (presumably) had an opportunity to purchase a through ticket at the start of his journey or to get off and buy one at his ticket changeover point, any defense would hinge on convincing a magistrate that he really did get off at the station where he changed tickets, and that that was sufficient to render his journey discontinuous, and that he was exercising his earliest possible opportunity to buy a ticket on a completely separate journey. I am not optimistic on this point and would urge the OP to seek the advice of a solicitor, if they are minded not to plead guilty at the earliest possible opportunity.

 

[maniacmartin]

I don't think it's wise to claim it was two separate journeys, as you would then be expected to buy a ticket for the second journey at Cardiff ticket office at the start of the second journey.

Your quote from 5(3)(b) does mention intent to avoid payment though. Without considering intent, anyone using a permit to travel machine could be liable to prosecution! However I too am not overly optimistic of the prospects of defending this case in court.

 

[John @ home]

In this case the relevant part of 5(3) is, in my opinion, clause 5(3)(b):

5(3)(b)Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof;

As unlike 5(3)(a) there is no mention of intent for this clause, it is likely to be treated as strict liability.

I don't agree. It is plain that, in order to contravene 5(3)(b), it is necessary for a passenger, having paid the fare for a certain distance,

• knowingly and wilfully to proceed by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and
• to have intent to avoid payment of the additional fare.

 

[BrownE]

Michael, I think you may have misread, allow me to highlight this below.

In this case the relevant part of 5(3) is, in my opinion, clause 5(3)(b):

5(3)(b)Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

As unlike 5(3)(a) there is no mention of intent for this clause, it is likely to be treated as strict liability.

 

[SWTCommuter]

...point 3 in the NRCOC, which is very clear that there's no need to delay yourself to buy tickets if they weren't available at the start of your journey, as long as you buy them at the first opportunity.

It's not 'very clear' at all because it depends on one's interpretation of 'reasonably' in 'reasonably practicable'. Your interpretation is obviously different to mine. There will be circumstances when a delay would be reasonable and others when it wouldn't, and they will be a matter of opinion. At the end of the day, if point 3 is relevant in deciding intent to avoid payment, it will be the magistrate's opinion of what is reasonable that will count.

 

[RJ]

Condition 3 applies where the "full range" is not available, which was the case at Treforest.

If the full range of tickets had been available then presumably the OP would have bought the tickets required for the journey. The OP only partially complied with Condition 3 as a ticket to Cardiff was bought but it would appear that the other ticket required was not purchased at the first opportunity which was likely on the train from Treforest.

There is nothing to suggest that Condition 3 "does not apply" in certain circumstances, it applies when the full range is not available. Clearly most ticket machines cannot sell the "full range" of tickets (Southern machines are pretty close though).

The wording of Condition 3 clearly applies to journeys where only one ticket is to be used.

There's a time and a place for arguing about implicit intentions - I'm of the view that when a TOC is threatening to tarnish your record and/or take hundreds of pounds from you, you work with the objective statements written in black and white, instead of taking the opportunity to have a discussion about interpretation. I do the former and it always gets me out of bother. If anything is to be learned from my capers with EMT, it's that you cover your ar*e with an objective, cast iron defence and don't back down. Because once they can start picking holes in your argument, you leave yourself in a position of vulnerability.