Northern Rail Took My season ticket and will issue an MG11

[222007]

Personally i would never sell a ticket and then refund it if i suspected an offence had taken place. From how i work i ask a couple of simple questions from the answers i can see whether a few more questions would be in order. Every situation is different i never prejudge a situation

 

[34D]

Before you start instructing a solicitor, wait and see what Northern intend to do. It is entirely possible (even probable) that they will let the matter lie (with or without their standard £80 slap on the wrist).

If they intend to proceed with a Byelaw 18 prosecution, then just plead guilty as you don't have a strong defence, and the consequence of an early guilty plea is limited (i.e. no criminal record).

If (and only if) they intend to proceed with a more serious charge (e.g. RoRA), should you consider retaining the services of a solicitor.

Far too early for advice on how to plead if a byelaw prosecution is offered. Let's wait and see how postal contact goes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That is fine. Byelaw 18 states:
"(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
16
(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or
validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where,
he began his journey; or
(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey
permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a
valid ticket. "

"authorised person” means:
(i) a person acting in the course of his duties who:
(a) is an employee or agent of an Operator, or
(b) any other person authorised by an Operator, or
(ii) any constable, acting in the execution of his duties upon or in
connection with the railway; "

Clearly the booking clerk and the guard act as such. In such cases, I would always suggest asking the guard before boarding, as:
a) you are clearly showing intent to pay
b) the guard knows that he has given you permission

Good that someone has posted this. As 18 (3) iii has been complied with, any byelaw prosecution cannot succeed.

 

[najaB]

Far too early for advice on how to plead if a byelaw prosecution is offered. Let's wait and see how postal contact goes.

If Northern intend to proceed with a Byelaw 18 prosecution what grounds is there to challenge it? The OP boarded the train without a ticket, having passed an opportunity to purchase.

 

[34D]

If Northern intend to proceed with a Byelaw 18 prosecution what grounds is there to challenge it? The OP boarded the train without a ticket, having passed an opportunity to purchase.

With the permission of a guard, who sold her a ticket, using his discretion.

 

[najaB]

With the permission of a guard, who sold her a ticket, using his discretion.

I get where you are coming from, but the offence was committed when the OP stepped onto the train. The subsequent actions of the guard doesn't change the fact that were on the train, without a ticket, despite passing opportunities to purchase.

 

[34D]

I get where you are coming from, but the offence was committed when the OP stepped onto the train. The subsequent actions of the guard doesn't change the fact that were on the train, without a ticket, despite passing opportunities to purchase.

In my view they do. And 18(3)iii of the byelaws seems to agree. This is the point of division amongst forum members, I would suspect.

Plus the related secondary point of 'can a passenger with a valid ticket* be placed into a state of criminal non-compliance by a member of staff refunding all/some/one of the tickets held and then taking details to pass to the prosecution team?

* = this passenger was in such a valid state, albeit for a minute or so.

 

[gray1404]

In my view they do. And 18(3)iii of the byelaws seems to agree. This is the point of division amongst forum members, I would suspect.

Plus the related secondary point of 'can a passenger with a valid ticket* be placed into a state of criminal non-compliance by a member of staff refunding all/some/one of the tickets held and then taking details to pass to the prosecution team?

* = this passenger was in such a valid state, albeit for a minute or so.

VERY interesting point.... about a customer being placed back into a state of non compliance by a member of staff refunding tickets/taking details...

 

[najaB]

VERY interesting point.... about a customer being placed back into a state of non compliance by a member of staff refunding tickets/taking details...

I agree that refunding the ticket complicates a RoRA prosecution but, at risk of repeating myself, the OP had neither a valid ticket, nor permission to proceed without one when they boarded the train. The Byelaw 18 offence was complete at that point and no subsequent action of either the passenger or the guard can change that.

The guard initially chose to ignore the fact that they had broken the law then changed his mind - a bit unusual but not unprecedented - but that doesn't change the OPs actions up to that point.

 

[34D]

I agree that refunding the ticket complicates a RoRA prosecution but, at risk of repeating myself, the OP had neither a valid ticket, nor permission to proceed without one when they boarded the train. The Byelaw 18 offence was complete at that point and no subsequent action of either the passenger or the guard can change that.

The guard initially chose to ignore the fact that they had broken the law then changed his mind - a bit unusual but not unprecedented - but that doesn't change the OPs actions up to that point.

Surely you acknowledge that, if only for a couple of minutes, this passenger was fully legal?

It could be a good tactic for some TOCs to send the guard through the train with the refund machine, then have RPI's follow him, and then write to people asking for a settlement.

 

[najaB]

Surely you acknowledge that, if only for a couple of minutes, this passenger was fully legal?

As far as Byelaw 18 is concerned, nope. For completeness, it states:

18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas
(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.

Note that it makes no reference to posessing a ticket at a later stage of the journey, just to entering the train. Did the OP have a valid ticket when they entered the train for the purpose of travelling?

 

[34D]

Let's look at the whole of Byelaw 18:

18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas

(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.

(2) A person shall hand over his ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.

(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, he began his journey; or
(ii) there was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or
(iii) an authorised person gave him permission to travel without a valid ticket.

Breeching 18(1) gets regularised by 18(3) all the time, usually by i or ii but sometimes by the actions of a member of staff doing iii.

The issue in this case of course is whether the staff, in issuing the ticket, did indeed act under iii (let's totally ignore the subsequent refund for now).

 

[ian959]

Your argument has no basis, because permission to travel would have had to be given BEFORE the travel commenced NOT after travel had commenced.

 

[najaB]

The issue in this case of course is whether the staff, in issuing the ticket, did indeed act under iii (let's totally ignore the subsequent refund for now).

Well no, because unless the passenger asks at the door before boarding, then they haven't been given permission to travel without a ticket. They've been sold a ticket, which regularises part 18(2).

 

[gray1404]

Would matters be any different here if the OP had have refused to hand over their bank card for the refund to be put back on it..... Lets remember there is legal duty to hand over a ticket on demand, but not a bank card even if it has been used for payment.

 

[najaB]

Would matters be any different here if the OP had have refused to hand over their bank card for the refund to be put back on it...

I don't see that it would change matters that much. The OP would still have boarded at St Helens with a ticket that was only valid between Eccles and Manchester.

 

[Camden]

Interesting point really. The ticket is the property of the railway, but her bank card certainly is not.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . 'can a passenger with a valid ticket* be placed into a state of criminal non-compliance by a member of staff refunding all/some/one of the tickets held and then taking details to pass to the prosecution team?

VERY interesting point.... about a customer being placed back into a state of non compliance by a member of staff refunding tickets/taking details...

No. The 'compliant' passenger is NOT manipulated into 'a state of criminal non-compliance by a member of staff refunding . . . . the ticket(s)' by an officer gathering evidence. There are countless examples of this in parallel situations of evidence gathering (see PACE).
If the ticket is evidence of a contract to be conveyed at the point of embarkation, then it is evidence of a contract to be conveyed throughout, even if gathered as evidence in an investigation.

 

[clagmonster]

As 18 (3) iii has been complied with, any byelaw prosecution cannot succeed.

With the permission of a guard, who sold her a ticket, using his discretion.

I think you are confusing two incidents. On the incident that cml2015 has been reported for, no permission was granted before boarding the train. This post below, describes the second event, which is why I posted the byelaw in full.

Today, I travelled from Lea Green as my best friend is driving us home from Manchester tonight. So I haven't drove and parked to get to work today. When getting to the station I tried to buy a ticket from the ticket office. The attendant told me the train was due in a minute or two so he said just go down to the platform and buy your ticket on the train. So I went to the platform and before boarding the train I asked the guard if I could purchase a ticket on the train. She said yes of course you can. So today I purchased my ticket on the train. There is also a poster saying that the guard will happily sell you a ticket if you haven't got one.

So I understand the law, which is clear. But the problem here is that Northern Rail muddy the water by situations such as these. Their actions indicate that it is ok to buy your ticket on the train.

 

[reb0118]

Would matters be any different here if the OP had have refused to hand over their bank card for the refund to be put back on it..... Lets remember there is legal duty to hand over a ticket on demand, but not a bank card even if it has been used for payment.

You no longer need the bank card to process a refund. Simply non issuing the ticket prompts the system to produce a refund to the relevant account.

This is much better than the previous system whereby it was possible to refund to any card not necessarily the card used for the original transaction - this gave a possibility for some quite serious frauds.

 

[34D]

I think you are confusing two incidents. On the incident that cml2015 has been reported for, no permission was granted before boarding the train. This post below, describes the second event, which is why I posted the byelaw in full.

I wasn't confusing them. The time in question she boarded the train in contravention of 18(1) but when the guard happened upon her, he elected to regularise her position by selling a ticket as per 18(3). She was then legit. Then he did his refund thing.

 

[najaB]

I wasn't confusing them. The time in question she boarded the train in contravention of 18(1) but when the guard happened upon her, he elected to regularise her position by selling a ticket as per 18(3). She was then legit. Then he did his refund thing.

Again, read the Byelaw:

"(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel."

It doesn't say 'shall remain' so unless the guard was also in possession of a time machine there was nothing he could do to regularise the position after the fact. Selling a ticket on the train only allows the OP to present a ticket to an authorised person later in the journey to prevent breaches of 18 (2). It also prevents further breaches of 18 (1) later in their journey.

 

[joke2711]

Again, read the Byelaw:

"(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel."

It doesn't say 'shall remain' so unless the guard was also in possession of a time machine there was nothing he could do to regularise the position after the fact. Selling a ticket on the train only allows the OP to present a ticket to an authorised person later in the journey to prevent breaches of 18 (2). It also prevents further breaches of 18 (1) later in their journey.

Whilst I am fully aware the by-laws state that you should have a ticket before travel. Northern do advertise at some of their stations that if you haven't purchased a ticket prior to travel you can get one on the train at the walk-up fare. The wording of this allows you to take this option even if there is ticket purchasing facilities available.

 

[najaB]

The wording of this allows you to take this option even if there is ticket purchasing facilities available.

And this isn't inconsistent with the law. Just because technically speaking an offence has occurred, the TOC isn't obliged to prosecute.

 

[Agent_c]

In the case of a poster saying you can buy on the train, couldn't this be seen as an open ended offer/authorisation to travel by an officer of the railway (specifically whomever approved the sign), not how unlike an advertisement can become a contract with anyone in carlil v Carbolic Smoke ball or a vending machine can make contracts with anyone in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking.

 

[cuccir]

Again, there may some benefit to holding off all this hypothetical discussion, until it ever happens that the OP is actually charged with any of these offences...

 

[ian959]

In the case of a poster saying you can buy on the train, couldn't this be seen as an open ended offer/authorisation to travel by an officer of the railway (specifically whomever approved the sign), not how unlike an advertisement can become a contract with anyone in carlil v Carbolic Smoke ball or a vending machine can make contracts with anyone in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking.

I would hate to argue in court that a poster is an authorised person...

 

[gray1404]

I would hate to argue in court that a poster is an authorised person...

It would be words to the effect that there wwas a poster give permission (to buy a ticket on the train).

 

[najaB]

It would be words to the effect that there wwas a poster give permission (to buy a ticket on the train).

Does anyone know if there is a copy of this poster available anywhere online? I've not seen it and I'm interested in the exact wording.

 

[steve a]

Does anyone know if there is a copy of this poster available anywhere online? I've not seen it and I'm interested in the exact wording.

Can't find a poster but this is on their website:

"For your safety, every single Northern Rail train has a conductor on-board (to operate the doors and despatch the train at stations) - if they are available, make it known you wish to purchase a ticket for the journey you want to make. If they aren’t available, or they are busy with another customer, please purchase a ticket when you arrive at your destination. If they do not pass through the carriage, and you are able to, you can try to find them to make your purchase."

There's nothing on the website to suggest it's OK to board without a ticket when starting from a station that has ticket selling facilities.

 

[Magicake]

In the case of a poster saying you can buy on the train, couldn't this be seen as an open ended offer/authorisation to travel by an officer of the railway (specifically whomever approved the sign), not how unlike an advertisement can become a contract with anyone in carlil v Carbolic Smoke ball or a vending machine can make contracts with anyone in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking.

There is no need for this - 18 (3) (ii) mentions:

" There was a notice at the station where he began his journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket "

In addition to the mention of an authorised person.