Excessive penalty?

[shepthedog]

I have received a First Capital Connect Travel Irregularity letter regarding my 17 year old son who is a full time student and does not work.

He recently travelled 3 stops, a 9 minute journey. He has a valid Oyster card but that only covers him to the 2nd stop so he does not use it. He buys tickets using his student railcard which cost £2.70 after discount.

On this occasion he lost his ticket between buying it earlier that day and using the train.

The ticket inspector checked him between the 2nd and 3rd stops when he explained what had happened. He did not have sufficient money to pay a penalty fare so the Inspector said he would have to report him but would recommend he is not fined as he 'liked him'.

We now have this letter regarding 'failing to hand over a rail ticket for inspection' stating we now have to pay £54.10 which includes the fare for the journey undertaken.

The full single fare is £4.10 and I assume the other £50 is fine/admin costs.

I consider in the circumstances this to be unfair and excessive. Views/advice please.

 

[island]

Is the letter a request for payment of this sum, or a letter threatening court action and saying that the company will request payment of these sums in court?

Bear in mind that your son has committed a criminal offence, so this could become a serious matter.

 

[shepthedog]

Hi, thanks for the prompt reply.

It says 'This letter is to inform you that on this occasion it is our initial intention to deal with this without court action, please send a payment of £54.10. This includes the fare for the journey undertaken.'
and
'Failure to pay the above amount will result in an additional administration charge being incurred and this matter being reported to the Magistrates Court.'

 

[steadmane]

Like parking for 5 minutes in a Pay and Display without paying while rushing to the pharmacy or paying but as you shut the window the ticket blows off the dashboard. It maybe unfair but it's best to consider making the payment because the escalation is even more unfair. Then it becomes like a game of chicken.

 

[maniacmartin]

I would pay the £54.10 and chalk it up to experience.

However, I think the fare due would only be the cost of the last part of the journey if a travelcard was held for the first 2 stops. Arguing this may agititate them and cause the administration fee to increase or them to decide to prosecute instead.

If this proceeds to court, FCC have a very easy case for prosecution under the Railway Byelaws, and they in a very litiguous mood lately.

 

[island]

I would pay up promptly, before it becomes more expensive and difficult. FCC is I believe the second most frequent train company mentioned on this forum in the context of potential prosecutions.

 

[ainsworth74]

Whilst it may seem harsh, I strongly suggest that you pay the sum requested. FCC would be well within their rights to take this matter to court and that, clearly, is a situation you'll want to avoid (especially as they're likely to win). Unfortunately I think you'll just have to chalk this up to experience.

 

[transmanche]

The full single fare is £4.10 and I assume the other £50 is fine/admin costs.

I consider in the circumstances this to be unfair and excessive. Views/advice please.

It might seem a lot, but if you compare it against the standard TfL penalty fare of £80*, it's not that excessive.

As others have suggested, it's best for your son to pay up and chalk it up to experience - and make sure not to make the same mistake again.

* Although that is reduced by 50% if paid promptly.

 

[Jim_]

Like parking for 5 minutes in a Pay and Display without paying while rushing to the pharmacy or paying but as you shut the window the ticket blows off the dashboard. It maybe unfair but it's best to consider making the payment because the escalation is even more unfair. Then it becomes like a game of chicken.

OT, but it's actually completely different from a pay and display ticket and that's the point. If your pay and display ticket blows off your dashboard (assuming it's a privately operated car park) you're not liable for any charge at all and in the case of not having a ticket you're only liable for the cost of the parking you used. In both cases you can probably safely ignore any demands for payment if you're that way inclined.

Thankfully the private parking companies don't have their own byelaws (yet!)

 

[bluenoxid]

Passenger Focus appear to be very interested in cases of disproportionate action so you may also want to contact them. However, you may be referred to London Travelwatch.

Whilst it may not get you very far, operators taking disproportionate action is starting to upset the right people so to speak.

 

[Squaddie]

Whatever the full facts of the incident, I don't think a £50 penalty for failing to produce a ticket is particularly disproportionate, especially when that will be the end of the matter.

 

[eastdyke]

Whatever the full facts of the incident, I don't think a £50 penalty for failing to produce a ticket is particularly disproportionate, especially when that will be the end of the matter.

Set against a Penalty Fare of £20 which could have been the result had the money been available on train I think that is is disproportianate.

No money sir? No problem, that will be an extra £34.10 please.

 

[jon0844]

It's nice to see a real example of FCC proactively seeking a settlement without being asked, clearly not wanting to go to court and not wanting to go down the penalty fare route.

I had been told by multiple sources that this is now what they're doing, but it's always good to have actual evidence.

However, I am not sure they've done anything wrong and I'd go along with the advice to pay up. FCC is being tough and hopefully word is getting around.

 

[RJ]

It's nice to see a real example of FCC proactively seeking a settlement without being asked, clearly not wanting to go to court and not wanting to go down the penalty fare route.

No, it's not. They're circumventing the PF system in order to extract higher sums of money from people. Pay or or be prosecuted sounds like blackmail to me, nobody can say anything if the passenger offers a settlement first.

 

[RPI]

No, it's not. They're circumventing the PF system in order to extract higher sums of money from people. Pay or or be prosecuted sounds like blackmail to me, nobody can say anything if the passenger offers a settlement first.

I disagree, it's a way of dealing with minor offences without bothering the courts, the courts are very much in favour of this type of action! Out of interest when is he 18?

 

[jon0844]

I didn't mean nice in that way, rather more that this was proof that they are doing it.

It's one thing if they opted to take people to court and then accepted an approach to settle, but this shows they are offering the settlement themselves. Therefore, they're clearly trying to avoid court and use this to raise more money than a PF.

 

[Parham Wood]

Is it possible for a person with no means to pay on them to ring up a relative/friend and use their credit card/debit card?

 

[GadgetMan]

Is it possible for a person with no means to pay on them to ring up a relative/friend and use their credit card/debit card?

Not on board or using a telephone. However if both the person wanting to travel and their friend/relative who are willing to pay can get to a Ticket office then yes. It's called the SILK (Stranded Individual(s) Location Known) arrangement.

The person making payment must visit their nearest Ticket office, pay the fare plus admin fee ( currently £10) and the ticket will then be printed and handed to the stranded person at the other ticket office depending on where they are.

Only Anytime tickets are available through this process.

 

[eastdyke]

I disagree, it's a way of dealing with minor offences without bothering the courts, the courts are very much in favour of this type of action! Out of interest when is he 18?

Since when did penalty fares involve the courts?

Penalty Fares are subject to an agreed procedure between the DfT/FCC/Passengers in a way regulated with safeguards to deal with 'innocent mistakes' without involving the courts.

Sadly, to avoid possible future issues for the passenger, I agree that paying the demand promptly now may be the best way forward.

Nonetheless I believe that this may have the makings of a possible 'case' to highlight the disparate arrangements applied in a disparate manner by disparate TOC's who seem to have cottened on to the fact that they can ask for £50 or more rather than £20.

OUR RAILWAY deserves better.

Of course those that have got used to my observations will know that I believe £20 to be too little for a proper PF. But we are where we are and FCC are for now at least, along with Northern, seemingly taking advantage of a period of weakness by DfT.

 

[34D]

I disagree, it's a way of dealing with minor offences without bothering the courts, the courts are very much in favour of this type of action! Out of interest when is he 18?

This is an important question, which the OP needs to answer to receive the best advice from this forum.

 

[185]

We now have this letter regarding 'failing to hand over a rail ticket for inspection' stating we now have to pay £54.10 which includes the fare for the journey undertaken.

The full single fare is £4.10 and I assume the other £50 is fine/admin costs.

I consider in the circumstances this to be unfair and excessive. Views/advice please.

All disappears into insignifigance when you see the fines abroard.

Service I am currently sat has a AUD$220 (£160) spot fine.

 

[shepthedog]

Thanks for all messages to date.

My son will be 18 next November, he has only been 17 for a couple of weeks.

I see the overwhelming view is to take the salutory lesson and pay.

Subject to further posts I am likely to do so over the next couple of days, albeit with reservations.

I still feel aggrieved at the level of this penalty, perhaps enhanced by the fact that I know my son had a ticket which he lost (in case there are any doubters out there. I know my son well enough that he would tell me the absolute truth) and also as a regular Mon to Fri user of FCC who on two occasions has stepped in to help FCC staff, once at Kings Cross when there was a full-scale punch up with football fans and more recently on a train when the Revenue Inspector was loudly threatened by someone on drugs.

Totally irrelevant to the current situation I accept but still rankles with me.

Thanks for all help.

Best regards

 

[Greenback]

Naturally it will rankle when a ticket is lost and money has to be paid out as a result. I too have lost tickets and had to pay up, although luckily I knew I had lost my ticket before boarding the train so I was not penalised as such, I just had to buy another ticket, which was in excess of £50 IIRC. To this day, I will not board a train without first checking that my ticket is on my person somewhere!

You could offer to pay the company less, but I'm not sure it would be worth the investment in time and effort, but you would have to weigh that against your level of frustration, the amount of money saved and how likely you think it would be for FCC to accept a lower amount. Personally, I wouldn't bother, and would treat it as a very important lesson learned for your son.

 

[John @ home]

I think it would be helpful if shepthedog could make another couple of posts, so that they are in a position to receive Private Messages. These appear to be enabled shortly after a new member has made 5 posts.

 

[RPI]

Missing the point that the OP's son was offered a PF in the first place but couldn't pay it, just to clarify, was the OP's son asked to pay an amount equivalent to the Anytime Day Single as part payment to which he had no funds or was he asked to pay the full amount of the PF to which he didn't have funds, the answer to this is very important.

 

[shepthedog]

He was asked to pay the full penalty fare as he could not produce a valid ticket. He had no money to do so.

 

[Wath Yard]

Is it not still the case where the passenger must be given 21 days to pay the PF, except the option to request payment of the equivalent of the full single ticket?

 

[island]

The passenger has the option to pay the full single fare there and then and the balance of the Penalty Fare within 21 days.

However, it must be remembered that an Authorised Collector has discretion not to charge a Penalty Fare and instead to report for prosecution.

 

[shepthedog]

So is it right the penalty fare does not only have to be paid on the day? Therefore I MAY have a position to request to pay the penalty fare (£20) and full single fare (£4.10), but any discretion to accept would be down to FCC as is the 'discretion' of the Inspector not to charge a penalty fare but go straight to the report for prosecution option?

I am all for discretion, when it is equitably applied.

 

[Wath Yard]

However, it must be remembered that an Authorised Collector has discretion not to charge a Penalty Fare and instead to report for prosecution.

Although in this case it appears as though he was willing to deal with the situation by way of a PF, changed his mind when the passenger couldn't pay it at the time and reported him, but recommended not to prosecute.