Merseyrail to adopt national Penalty Fare policy

[JBuchananGB]

According to a large poster displayed at Southport Station, with effect from today 17 July, Merseyrail is introducing the national Penalty Fare process, i.e £100 plus avoided fare, reduced by £50 for prompt payment. Who knew?

Penalty Fares

www.merseyrail.org

From the 17th July, changes to the National Penalty Fare scheme means the amount fare-evaders will be charged, including those caught on the Merseyrail network, is increasing.

 

[185143]

Can't help but immediately notice their claims of using an off peak ticket at "peak time" being a PF offence.

That's not the case nationally, is it?

 

[furlong]

Except they've made some changes!

Did anyone proof read this for sense?

What if I want to buy a season ticket and the ticket office is closed, or the machine doesn’t sell the ticket I want?

If the Ticket Vending Machines doesn’t sell the ticket you need, you should buy a ticket to the nearest staffed ticket office, where your single ticket will be exchanged for the one you need.

I wonder what happens when that 'nearest staffed ticket office' is not a Merseyrail one which doesn't follow such a policy? And of course what if that nearest staffed ticket office is not on your route and you won't be going there because it's in the opposite direction to your travel? I take 'exchanged' to mean no money changes hands. You lose out if the ticket you needed was cheaper, or gain if it was more expensive. Very generous of them! A self-imposed incentive to fix their self-service machines to offer the full ranges of fares, discounts and excesses!

 

[Starmill]

Can't help but immediately notice their claims of using an off peak ticket at "peak time" being a PF offence.

That's not the case nationally, is it?

Nationally, the Conditions are clear that you that you will be charged the difference. They don't specifically say you can't be charged a Penalty Fare. However, logically it's pretty clear if it says that you would be charged the difference then you wouldn't be charged a Penalty Fare because that's not the difference.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nationally, the Conditions are clear that you that you will be charged the difference. They don't specifically say you can't be charged a Penalty Fare. However, logically it's pretty clear if it says that you would be charged the difference then you wouldn't be charged a Penalty Fare because that's not the difference.

I can see nothing in the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 which prevents the charging of a Penalty Fare in that case. Indeed, the list of things that constitute a valid ticket includes route and time.

I think this may have changed since a previous version of the Regulations?

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018

These Regulations make provision for the charging of penalty fares for the failure to produce, when required to do so, a ticket or other authority authorising a person to travel by train or to be present in a compulsory ticket area at a station.

www.legislation.gov.uk

(a)any reference to a “valid travel ticket” is a reference to a travel ticket in a person’s possession which is valid for—

(i)the day and time of the journey that person is making, has made or intends to make;

(ii)the train and route used for that journey;

(iii)the age of that person;

(iv)use with any rail card in the possession of that person which they are entitled to use for that journey;

(v)use in combination with any other travel ticket in the possession of that person which they are entitled to use for that journey; and

(vi)the class of travel used by that person; and

(b)any reference to a person leaving a train includes a person present in or leaving—

(i)a station, having left a train arriving at that station; or

(ii)a compulsory ticket area, having left a train arriving at that compulsory ticket area.

 

[sheff1]

They say the National Penalty Fare Scheme changed on 17th July. What are the changes ?

 

[Starmill]

I can see nothing in the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 which prevents the charging of a Penalty Fare in that case. Indeed, the list of things that constitute a valid ticket includes route and time.

I think this may have changed since a previous version of the Regulations?

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018

These Regulations make provision for the charging of penalty fares for the failure to produce, when required to do so, a ticket or other authority authorising a person to travel by train or to be present in a compulsory ticket area at a station.

www.legislation.gov.uk

It's more that the train companies just formalised their policy of charging Penalty Fares for things that were not covered in the regulations by making them silent on the matter. They haven't amended the Conditions however which creates doubt about the fare due. Another situation is where the ticket isn't valid at that time of day, but the difference is zero or negative. Then the Conditions would imply travel can be made at no charge, but the guide book for RPIs will ask them to charge a Penalty Fare.

It's similar to how the Regulations provide a clear line on a payment method being unavailable when it was scheduled to be available, such as the ticket office being shut and the machine only accepting cash. They are silent on a payment method being unavailable generally.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's more that the train companies just formalised their policy of charging Penalty Fares for things that were not covered in the regulations by making them silent on the matter.

The Regulations aren't silent on the matter - they are quite clear - for a ticket to be "valid" it must be for the correct route and time.

This rather conflicts with the NRCoT, however, and I'm not sure what legal position that creates. (It's much more complex than simple contract law).

 

[Starmill]

The Regulations aren't silent on the matter - they are quite clear - for a ticket to be "valid" it must be for the correct route and time.

I disagree. They don't determine if the ticket is or isn't valid, nor do they purport to. Only the Conditions do.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree. They don't determine if the ticket is or isn't valid, nor do they purport to. Only the Conditions do.

For the purposes of the Penalty Fares Regulations they absolutely do. If something is defined inside a given law, that takes precedence over other definitions (if not it takes the "man on the Clapham omnibus" definition). I have quoted in a post above the section of the Regulations that define what the word "valid" means for the purposes of those Regulations, and that includes it being for the correct route and time. Nor do the Regulations exempt a ticket valid other than those two things.

The NRCoT complicates the situation, certainly - it's one where paid legal advice would be prudent if being prosecuted on these grounds. But the Regulations absolutely DO say a PF can be charged in these cases.

 

[Starmill]

For the purposes of the Penalty Fares Regulations they absolutely do. If something is defined inside a given law, that takes precedence over other definitions (if not it takes the "man on the Clapham omnibus" definition). I have quoted in a post above the section of the Regulations that define what the word "valid" means for the purposes of those Regulations, and that includes it being for the correct route and time. Nor do the Regulations exempt a ticket valid other than those two things.

The NRCoT complicates the situation, certainly - it's one where paid legal advice would be prudent if being prosecuted on these grounds. But the Regulations absolutely DO say a PF can be charged in these cases.

I think that you're misunderstanding. The Regulations aren't defining an offence, so you can't be prosecuted under them. The question of prosecution isn't really relevant at all to a Penalty Fare, unless it's the case that the Penalty Fare was neither paid nor appealed and is then withdrawn.

The Regulations are simply defining when the price is permitted to be different than usual for the purpose of the relevant TOC. The Conditions also define the same thing. And consumers are entitled to rely on the Conditions, the Regulations can't change if a ticket is valid or not. And a ticket may be valid under the Conditions but not the Regulations in any case.

If you use a ticket that's not valid at that time of day, but is otherwise valid, you could easily still be guilty of an offence if you had an opportunity to correct that at a ticket office and didn't take it. But you shouldn't be charged a Penalty Fare, only the difference in fares.

 

[Kite159]

Except they've made some changes!

Did anyone proof read this for sense?



I wonder what happens when that 'nearest staffed ticket office' is not a Merseyrail one which doesn't follow such a policy? And of course what if that nearest staffed ticket office is not on your route and you won't be going there because it's in the opposite direction to your travel? I take 'exchanged' to mean no money changes hands. You lose out if the ticket you needed was cheaper, or gain if it was more expensive. Very generous of them! A self-imposed incentive to fix their self-service machines to offer the full ranges of fares, discounts and excesses!

Or how easy it will be for the Merseyrail ticket office to exchange the single ticket into what you actually want (for example a day ranger) without grumbling and refusing to do it?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Or how easy it will be for the Merseyrail ticket office to exchange the single ticket into what you actually want (for example a day ranger) without grumbling and refusing to do it?

Or telling you that you'll have to go to Lime Street for that!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or how easy it will be for the Merseyrail ticket office to exchange the single ticket into what you actually want (for example a day ranger) without grumbling and refusing to do it?

Some TOCs can certainly do a non-issue and exchange, I've had that from both LM (as was) and SWR (more recently). However it is Merseyrail booking offices we're talking about here.

Also not going to work if the main station happens to be Chester, which given where the unstaffed stations are is rather likely.

 

[redreni]

I wouldn't hesitate to board a peak train with an off-peak ticket if my plans had changed and I wanted to excess it before travelling but couldn't because no facility to do so was offered.

One of many, many reasons why the proposals to close nearly all ticket offices are ill-advised is that it will make it impossible fairly to charge penalty fares to passengers wishing to excess a ticket in this way and it greatly increases the chances that of people arriving at their destination before they've had an opportunity to pay the excess, shrugging their shoulders and thinking "well, if they want the excess fare they should make it a bit easier to pay the bloody thing".

 

[Starmill]

I wouldn't hesitate to board a peak train with an off-peak ticket if my plans had changed and I wanted to excess it before travelling but couldn't because no facility to do so was offered.

Indeed. It would be most irrational to suggest that the customer should pay for a new ticket and then have to claim back the difference later.

 

[Hodgs0]

I think that you're misunderstanding. The Regulations aren't defining an offence, so you can't be prosecuted under them. The question of prosecution isn't really relevant at all to a Penalty Fare, unless it's the case that the Penalty Fare was neither paid nor appealed and is then withdrawn.

The Regulations are simply defining when the price is permitted to be different than usual for the purpose of the relevant TOC. The Conditions also define the same thing. And consumers are entitled to rely on the Conditions, the Regulations can't change if a ticket is valid or not. And a ticket may be valid under the Conditions but not the Regulations in any case.

If you use a ticket that's not valid at that time of day, but is otherwise valid, you could easily still be guilty of an offence if you had an opportunity to correct that at a ticket office and didn't take it. But you shouldn't be charged a Penalty Fare, only the difference in fares.

You cannot be criminally prosecuted for non payment of penalty fare. See section 12 of the penalty Fare regulations. They can only recover the debt as a civil matter. They would have had to cancel the penalty fare in line with the time limitations set out in the regulations in order to pursue a criminal prosecution.

 

[Starmill]

You cannot be criminally prosecuted for non payment of penalty fare. See section 12 of the penalty Fare regulations. They can only recover the debt as a civil matter. They would have had to cancel the penalty fare in line with the time limitations set out in the regulations in order to pursue a criminal prosecution.

Precisely.

 

[Kite159]

You cannot be criminally prosecuted for non payment of penalty fare. See section 12 of the penalty Fare regulations. They can only recover the debt as a civil matter. They would have had to cancel the penalty fare in line with the time limitations set out in the regulations in order to pursue a criminal prosecution.

I wonder how long until the government changes the regulations so a non-payment of a penalty fare after appeal can be recovered in the Magi Court?

 

[redreni]

I wonder how long until the government changes the regulations so a non-payment of a penalty fare after appeal can be recovered in the Magi Court?

If you could get a conviction for not paying the penalty fare, why couldn't you get a conviction for not paying the fare?

Isn't the point of the penalty fare to encourage people to purchase their ticket before they travel in cases where fare evasion can't be proved, or it's too much trouble to prove it?

All the same things would have to be proved to the same standard.

 

[Starmill]

Isn't the point of the penalty fare to encourage people to purchase their ticket before they travel in cases where fare evasion can't be proved, or it's too much trouble to prove it?

That may be what is claimed, but in practice no, certainly not.

If you could get a conviction for not paying the penalty fare, why couldn't you get a conviction for not paying the fare?

Well you could. Unless the penalty fare were paid, or under appeal.

 

[island]

I see no reason why a criminal prosecution could not be commenced under the Regulation of Railways Act for non-payment of a penalty fare that has not been appealed. It would be more usual to prosecute the original journey, of course.

 

[Starmill]

All the same things would have to be proved to the same standard.

Different arguments would likely be needed to secure a conviction for breaking a Byelaw than an unpaid Penalty Fare.

 

[redreni]

Different arguments would likely be needed to secure a conviction for breaking a Byelaw than an unpaid Penalty Fare.

Yes, there may be additional hurdles.

But if the defence could throw doubt on whether the defendant had evaded the fare to begin with, that defence would work equally well for a charge relating to the allegedly unpaid fare and/or the penalty fare, wouldn't it? Realistically it's never going to be an offence not to pay a wrongly issued penalty fare.

So I can't see how making it a criminal offence not to pay a penalty fare would make it possible to secure a conviction where it isn't possible already?

 

[Starmill]

But if the defence could throw doubt on whether the defendant had evaded the fare to begin with, that defence would work equally well for a charge relating to the allegedly unpaid fare and/or the penalty fare, wouldn't it? Realistically it's never going to be an offence not to pay a wrongly issued penalty fare.

Correct yes.

So I can't see how making it a criminal offence not to pay a penalty fare would make it possible to secure a conviction where it isn't possible already?

If you firstly committed a Byelaw offence, then were charged a Penalty Fare, and then submitted an appeal, as is commonplace, you couldn't subsequently be convicted of the Byelaw offence. That's just how it works. You could be sued for damages by the train operator though, assuming you didn't win your appeal. If you had won one of your rounds of appeal the train operator would be able to recover no more than the fare due, which would likely be £0.

 

[redreni]

Ah, okay.

Seems reasonable to me that you have to choose to go after someone by prosecuting them or by issuing a penalty fare, but not both.

Also seems reasonable that if you win an appeal against a penalty fare then they have to leave you alone.

Non-payment of penalty fares after appeal rights are exhausted sounds like part of a much wider issue with civil enforcement. I must say don't see inventing new offences as any kind of answer.

 

[Starmill]

Ah, okay.

Seems reasonable to me that you have to choose to go after someone by prosecuting them or by issuing a penalty fare, but not both.

Also seems reasonable that if you win an appeal against a penalty fare then they have to leave you alone.

Non-payment of penalty fares after appeal rights are exhausted sounds like part of a much wider issue with civil enforcement. I must say don't see inventing new offences as any kind of answer.

Thankfully it appears to be very uncommon for civil action to be taken in these circumstances, though if you lose your penalty fare appeal at the final stage, the possibility of being charged for the offence of not paying it wouldn't simply disappear. I agree that defining new offences would be very unhelpful in the round. I could see a certain logic to consolidation of some non ticket-related offences so that "fixed penalty" notices were possible for more Byelaw offences, such as feet on seats, however, that isn't being proposed so wouldn't be relevant (except in the speculation forum).

 

[Hodgs0]

I wonder how long until the government changes the regulations so a non-payment of a penalty fare after appeal can be recovered in the Magi Court?

I think that would undermine the whole point of penalty fare scheme. It’s for use when there was clearly no malicious intent to avoid the fare it was an isolated incident. If you fight them on it ultimately they can recover the debt through a civil court & that could still impact you in other ways.

That may be what is claimed, but in practice no, certainly not.

Well you could. Unless the penalty fare were paid, or under appeal.

You can’t criminally prosecute & charge a penalty fare for the same incident of ticketless travel. You either chose to criminally prosecute or choose to issue a penalty fare. Once in the penalty fare scheme it is a civil process unless they cancel the fare in the limited period stated (which is quite short).

 

[Starmill]

You can’t criminally prosecute & charge a penalty fare for the same incident of ticketless travel. You either chose to criminally prosecute or choose to issue a penalty fare. Once in the penalty fare scheme it is a civil process unless they cancel the fare in the limited period stated (which is quite short).

As I pointed out, you can cancel a Penalty Fare that hasn't been appealed or paid, and file for the charges instead. That occasionally happens.

I think that would undermine the whole point of penalty fare scheme. It’s for use when there was clearly no malicious intent to avoid the fare it was an isolated incident.

That may be what they say, but that's not the law.

If you fight them on it ultimately they can recover the debt through a civil court & that could still impact you in other ways.

If you win your appeal they would lose any damages claim based on travelling without paying, unless you didn't pay the original ticket price at the time or during the Penalty Fare process. If you lost your third stage appeal and still didn't pay the penalty fare...

 

[AY1975]

According to a large poster displayed at Southport Station, with effect from today 17 July, Merseyrail is introducing the national Penalty Fare process, i.e £100 plus avoided fare, reduced by £50 for prompt payment. Who knew?

Penalty Fares

www.merseyrail.org

According to the Penalty Fares page on the Merseyrail website linked from entry #1 above, Penalty Fares may be charged if you "do not print a ticket issued through an online third-party retailer (e.g. Trainline) before travelling".

I presume this means Merseyrail Revenue Protection Inspectors, unlike those of most other operators, won't accept e-tickets presented on your phone or tablet: they will only accept e-tickets that have been printed out.

In practice, this situation shouldn't arise anyway, because AIUI Merseyrail doesn't offer e-tickets for journeys wholly by or involving Merseyrail, and no train operators or third-party ticket retailers such as Trainline should offer e-tickets if they haven't been enabled for the journey requested.