Paid for e-ticket - phone died, penalty fare issued, first appeal unsuccessful.

[MaxM]

I would be very grateful for any help.

As the title explains, I bought the correct e-ticket for my journey but my phone ran out of battery. I was issued a penalty fare as I was unable to present my ticket, with the assurance if I had a valid ticket charges would be dropped. I naively found this reassuring.

I have proof of purchase and copy of the ticket and other relevant evidence which I submitted in my appeal but this was unsuccessful. I also have the same day return ticket which I used.

I understand this is a case of not being able to present a ticket when asked. In the appeal outcome letter, it says 'Whether or not a ticket was bought is not being disputed by the train company' which seems to be another way of saying 'it doesn't matter if you bought the ticket, we will fine you anyway'. However, I will appeal again as this is allowed.

This is extremely frustrating as it seems I am being charged the same penalty as a person who hasn't bought a ticket (100 pounds plus a single fare). Furthermore, it is actually rather difficult for me to pay this fine at the moment.

Does anyone have any advice to improve my chances of a successful appeal? And in the likely event it is unsuccessful, could I establish a payment plan?

 

[glasgowniteowl]

Best chance would be on signage grounds at the station you left from, what station did you board at? Some forum members may be able to advise if signage is compliant at that station

Also what journey were you under taking and exactly where were you on that journey were you when the penalty fare was issued?

 

[MaxM]

Best chance would be on signage grounds at the station you left from, what station did you board at? Some forum members may be able to advise if signage is compliant at that station

Also what journey were you under taking and exactly where were you on that journey were you when the penalty fare was issued?

Thank you for the reply. I boarded at Brighton travelling to London Blackfriars and received the penalty fare at Haywards Heath, according to the penalty fare ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

Could you upload the notice with your personal details removed? Sometimes there are technical defences surrounding how the notice has been filled out.

 

[MaxM]

Could you upload the notice with your personal details removed? Sometimes there are technical defences surrounding how the notice has been filled out.

I've attached the penalty fare ticket hopefully with enough resolution. Thanks.

 

[Hadders]

Welcome to the forum!

Legally the train company is correct. A Penalty Fare is a higher than normal fare that is charged to someone that has made a mistake, like not being able to show a ticket when asked. Note that the amount is £50 plus the fare if paid within 21 days. An appeal 'stops the clock' on the 21 days so it is always worth appealing. Also, if you appeal the train company is unable to prosecute you in the Magistrates Court.

I do agree that it is all rather bonkers but unfortunately the law is stacked in favour of the train companies. You can appeal three times, and it's not until it gets to stage 3 that it is looked at by a proper independent panel, so do appeal again. As noted above it might be worth checking the signage at Brighton Station to make sure it complies with the Penalty Fare regulations - others will be able to advise on the exact wording - a prescribed form of words must be used and the signagae at many station is deficient. It might also be worth appealing for 'compelling reasons', citing that you purchased a ticket but were not able to display it due to your phone running out of battery.

 

[WesternLancer]

Should the OP have been given the chance to get off the train at the next stop (Balcombe? gatwick Airport?) which would have reduced the fare element of the sum charged - tho do staff ask the question about where the passenger is heading to in a manner that effectively removes this option?

Any payment plan (not sure they are offered anyway) would remove the prospects of a 50% prompt payment discount - - which reduces the Penalty Element from £100 to £50 (an Appeal - if one is made stops the clock so that discount can still be available if an Appeal is made but unsuccessful - so if cash is short making an Appeal might help buy time to save up the sum required).

OP's situation not helped of course by the fact that Thameslink trains have no charging points in Std Class areas of the train

Edit - I note uploaded doc suggests a deadline of 6 feb to Appeal so very short time left to submit an appeal.

 

[MaxM]

Welcome to the forum!

Legally the train company is correct. A Penalty Fare is a higher than normal fare that is charged to someone that has made a mistake, like not being able to show a ticket when asked. Note that the amount is £50 plus the fare if paid within 21 days. An appeal 'stops the clock' on the 21 days so it is always worth appealing. Also, if you appeal the train company is unable to prosecute you in the Magistrates Court.

I do agree that it is all rather bonkers but unfortunately the law is stacked in favour of the train companies. You can appeal three times, and it's not until it gets to stage 3 that it is looked at by a proper independent panel, so do appeal again. As noted above it might be worth checking the signage at Brighton Station to make sure it complies with the Penalty Fare regulations - others will be able to advise on the exact wording - a prescribed form of words must be used and the signagae at many station is deficient. It might also be worth appealing for 'compelling reasons', citing that you purchased a ticket but were not able to display it due to your phone running out of battery.

That's very useful, thank you. I will make sure to add that wording and have a look at the signage once I know what to look for. I will persist with the appeals process.

Should the OP have been given the chance to get off the train at the next stop (Balcombe? gatwick Airport?) which would have reduced the fare element of the sum charged - tho do staff ask the question about where the passenger is heading to in a manner that effectively removes this option?

Any payment plan (not sure they are offered anyway) would remove the prospects of a 50% prompt payment discount - - which reduces the Penalty Element from £100 to £50 (an Appeal - if one is made stops the clock so that discount can still be available if an Appeal is made but unsuccessful - so if cash is short making an Appeal might help buy time to save up the sum required).

I was thinking the same when I discovered I could appeal up to 3 times. It also takes them a little while to process so giving a little extra time to save up the money, making it only a marginally less bitter pill to swallow...

Edit - In response to you mentioning the upcoming deadline, I submitted my first appeal sometime in January.

 

[island]

Should the OP have been given the chance to get off the train at the next stop (Balcombe? gatwick Airport?) which would have reduced the fare element of the sum charged - tho do staff ask the question about where the passenger is heading to in a manner that effectively removes this option?

This is an important question, MaxM: when the Penalty Fare was issued, did you ask or otherwise discuss or request that it be made valid to London Blackfriars? If not, it may be invalid as it should have been issued to the next stop.

Any payment plan (not sure they are offered anyway) would remove the prospects of a 50% prompt payment discount - - which reduces the Penalty Element from £100 to £50 (an Appeal - if one is made stops the clock so that discount can still be available if an Appeal is made but unsuccessful - so if cash is short making an Appeal might help buy time to save up the sum required).

Just to confirm there are no payment plans offered for penalty fares. The amount is due in one go.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Welcome to the forum!

Legally the train company is correct. A Penalty Fare is a higher than normal fare that is charged to someone that has made a mistake, like not being able to show a ticket when asked. Note that the amount is £50 plus the fare if paid within 21 days. An appeal 'stops the clock' on the 21 days so it is always worth appealing. Also, if you appeal the train company is unable to prosecute you in the Magistrates Court.

I do agree that it is all rather bonkers but unfortunately the law is stacked in favour of the train companies. You can appeal three times, and it's not until it gets to stage 3 that it is looked at by a proper independent panel, so do appeal again. As noted above it might be worth checking the signage at Brighton Station to make sure it complies with the Penalty Fare regulations - others will be able to advise on the exact wording - a prescribed form of words must be used and the signagae at many station is deficient. It might also be worth appealing for 'compelling reasons', citing that you purchased a ticket but were not able to display it due to your phone running out of battery.

I’m not sure that it is “bonkers” and that it is a compelling reason.

Revenue protection needs to be fast and efficient to get through the number of people that are on a train, and if they were constantly having to stop to deal with people whose phone have died by 0940 in the morning they would never do the job effectively. And the cost to the industry in handling all the PF cases only to let people off would be disproportionate.

Ultimately if people want to use an e-ticket facility they have to accept it’s their responsibility to have a working phone. Even though I don’t use my phone for ticketing I never go on a train journey of any length without a small power bank which lives in my rucksack for when it’s needed.

 

[island]

I’m not sure that it is “bonkers” and that it is a compelling reason.

Revenue protection needs to be fast and efficient to get through the number of people that are on a train, and if they were constantly having to stop to deal with people whose phone have died by 0940 in the morning they would never do the job effectively. And the cost to the industry in handling all the PF cases only to let people off would be disproportionate.

Agreed. Moreover, if someone was let off in these circumstances, what is to stop them having a second copy of the ticket used by someone else on the same or a different train?

Ultimately if people want to use an e-ticket facility they have to accept it’s their responsibility to have a working phone.

Or print off the ticket

 

[VT118]

Phones aren't always reliable though. I once had a phone that used to power down at 30% battery.

I also had a phone that suddenly malfunctioned and the screen stopped working.

If either of these things had happened during a journey then I could have been fined. Seems a bit harsh.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Phones aren't always reliable though. I once had a phone that used to power down at 30% battery.

I also had a phone that suddenly malfunctioned and the screen stopped working.

If either of these things had happened during a journey then I could have been fined. Seems a bit harsh.

If you had a phone that you knew was unreliable, such as powering down at 30%, you should either not use it or carry a power bank.

The clue is in the very words you used - not reliable, which means you cannot rely on it.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Phones aren't always reliable though. I once had a phone that used to power down at 30% battery.

I also had a phone that suddenly malfunctioned and the screen stopped working.

If either of these things had happened during a journey then I could have been fined. Seems a bit harsh.

However it would be the same problem if you lost your paper ticket. Its failing to show a valid ticket. I prefer to avoid relying on the phone as a paper ticket is more reliable. In this case one would hope that an appeal based on proving one had bought a ticket would have some success.

 

[island]

In this case one would hope that an appeal based on proving one had bought a ticket would have some success.

Proving you bought a ticket cannot be sufficient as the ticket could have been for another person.

 

[jon81uk]

I’m not sure that it is “bonkers” and that it is a compelling reason.

Revenue protection needs to be fast and efficient to get through the number of people that are on a train, and if they were constantly having to stop to deal with people whose phone have died by 0940 in the morning they would never do the job effectively. And the cost to the industry in handling all the PF cases only to let people off would be disproportionate.

Ultimately if people want to use an e-ticket facility they have to accept it’s their responsibility to have a working phone. Even though I don’t use my phone for ticketing I never go on a train journey of any length without a small power bank which lives in my rucksack for when it’s needed.

I would agree, I'd maybe expect the person checking tickets to have a bit more leniency at 11pm at night when it is much more likely to be an unplanned mistake, but at 0948 I would expect people using e-tickets to plan ahead and ensure their phone is charged and working, if it isn't then purchase a paper ticket before boarding (and don't lose it).

Phones aren't always reliable though. I once had a phone that used to power down at 30% battery.

I also had a phone that suddenly malfunctioned and the screen stopped working.

If either of these things had happened during a journey then I could have been fined. Seems a bit harsh.

If you know you are likely to have issues then that isn't the best method of getting a ticket for you, get a better phone or a paper ticket, same as if you know you often lose paper tickets its probably a good idea to find a method to ensure you don't misplace them.

 

[MaxM]

This is an important question, MaxM: when the Penalty Fare was issued, did you ask or otherwise discuss or request that it be made valid to London Blackfriars? If not, it may be invalid as it should have been issued to the next stop.

Just to confirm there are no payment plans offered for penalty fares. The amount is due in one go.

Thank you for your response and everyone's interest. I told the inspector I was travelling to London Blackfriars, but did not specifically request this to be placed on the penalty fare - whether that makes a difference or not, I don't know.

To carry on an interesting discussion, my main frustration is that I have to pay the same amount (it seems) as someone who has not bought a ticket and thus have to pay a greater fine. Furthermore, I can absolutely prove I bought the ticket and travelled with it. As mentioned in the appeal outcome, it is not being disputed whether I bought the ticket. They know I bought the correct ticket, but the fine still stands. I am being charged, in a sense, for an administrative error the same way if I intentionally tried to avoid the train fare.

Losing a paper ticket is a different situation and different reasoning would apply which isn't applicable here.

 

[jumble]

Can someone who has a better grasp of English advise
If the PF states that reduced payment must be paid within 21 Days of the day after 16th January what is the last day on which the payment can be made to qualify?

 

[londonbridge]

Day after 16th is obviously 17th, twenty one days from the 17th is 7th Feb.

 

[jumble]

Day after 16th is obviously 17th, twenty one days from the 17th is 7th Feb.

That is what I thought
The PF however says amount due £71.50 if paid by 6th Feb
I wonder if this renders the PF invalid

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Day after 16th is obviously 17th, twenty one days from the 17th is 7th Feb.

The count is from the day of issue. 21 days after the day of issue which was 16th January, is 6th February (today).

 

[jumble]

The count is from the day of issue. 21 days after the day of issue which was 16th January, is 6th February (today).

This may be correct but the penalty fare attached by the OP appears to disagree
If you do not pay the reduced amount within 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the notice is charged the penalty fare will revert to the full amount

 

[MaxM]

This may be correct but the penalty fare attached by the OP appears to disagree
If you do not pay the reduced amount within 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the notice is charged the penalty fare will revert to the full amount

I have appealed so this should 'stop the clock' on the 21 days until the appeals process is finished.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Proving you bought a ticket cannot be sufficient as the ticket could have been for another person.

True but it does weaken the argument that the traveller made an attempt to evade a fare. It would be hard for the TOC to prove deliberate evasion if the original ticket was on the persons phone or bought using a card (or suchlike) that can be associated with the traveller.

 

[jumble]

This may be correct but the penalty fare attached by the OP appears to disagree
If you do not pay the reduced amount within 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the notice is charged the penalty fare will revert to the full amount

And indeed Regulation 9 of the

The Railways (Penalty Fares) (Amendment) Regulations 2022​

also states the same

 

[John Palmer]

The regulation relevant to your case is Regulation 5(5A) of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 (as amended), which is in the following terms:

“In respect of England, the penalty fare charged under paragraph (1) to a person travelling by or present on a train authorises a person to travel to—
(a) a station in England at which the train is due to make a scheduled call that they may specify, if the collector considers that this is reasonable in all the circumstances; or
(b) otherwise, the next station at which the train is due to make a scheduled call.”

The words I have emboldened show that a penalty fare can authorise travel beyond the next station at which the train is due to call only if its recipient specifies a different station at which the train is scheduled to call and the collector considers that such extended authority to travel is reasonable. The exact form of your conversation with the collector therefore makes a significant difference to whether the penalty fare was issued correctly or not. If you did not indicate that you wished to have authority to travel to Blackfriars (for which the penalty fare from Brighton to Blackfriars was £21.50 + £100 penalty element (subject to a £50 reduction for early payment) then the penalty fare issued to you should only have authorised travel as far as the next station at which the train was due to call.

A look at https://www.ontimetrains.co.uk/depa...rture=09:49;timeField=Departing;arrival=10:35 shows that your train was at or approaching its Haywards Heath stop when your penalty fare was issued at 09:48 on 16th January. So, unless you asked the collector to authorise travel to Blackfriars, the correct course was to authorise travel only as far as Haywards Heath for a penalty fare of £8.00 (Brighton to Haywards Heath) + £100 (again subject to a £50 reduction for early payment). The Regulations do not permit collectors to make a unilateral decision to authorise travel beyond the next scheduled station stop and consequently to charge a higher fare; they may do so on a discretionary basis, but only if the penalty fare recipient has, in some way, 'specified' a more distant station at which the train is due to call. As you say that this was not what happened in your case, you have a basis for a succesful appeal against issue of the penalty fare on the ground set out at Regulation 16(3)(a) of the 2018 Regulations, namely that “the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations” in that it authorised travel to a destination beyond the train's next scheduled calling point notwithstanding that you had made no request for such extended authority to travel.

 

[VT118]

What if you have phone charging facilities but the train you're travelling on has faulty power sockets? (happens frequently on Chiltern)

You had planned to, or regularly charge your phone on the commute, then the train company lets you down. Seems insane that this could lead to a fine.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thank you for your response and everyone's interest. I told the inspector I was travelling to London Blackfriars, but did not specifically request this to be placed on the penalty fare - whether that makes a difference or not, I don't know.

To carry on an interesting discussion, my main frustration is that I have to pay the same amount (it seems) as someone who has not bought a ticket and thus have to pay a greater fine. Furthermore, I can absolutely prove I bought the ticket and travelled with it. As mentioned in the appeal outcome, it is not being disputed whether I bought the ticket. They know I bought the correct ticket, but the fine still stands. I am being charged, in a sense, for an administrative error the same way if I intentionally tried to avoid the train fare.

Losing a paper ticket is a different situation and different reasoning would apply which isn't applicable here.

If they had a sense / strong feeling that someone had deliberately not bought a ticket they would, I think, not issue a penalty Fare - instead they would submit a Travel Irregularity Report - which is basically a process that is the 1st stage on the way to prosecution (many examples of that on here).

But I can appreciate your sense of unfairness and sympathise.

As a general point, make sure you always claim Delay Repay for delayed train journeys wherever you are legitimately able to claim it, if for no other reason than treating the railway in the same spirit...

The regulation relevant to your case is Regulation 5(5A) of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 (as amended), which is in the following terms:

“In respect of England, the penalty fare charged under paragraph (1) to a person travelling by or present on a train authorises a person to travel to—
(a) a station in England at which the train is due to make a scheduled call that they may specify, if the collector considers that this is reasonable in all the circumstances; or
(b) otherwise, the next station at which the train is due to make a scheduled call.”

The words I have emboldened show that a penalty fare can authorise travel beyond the next station at which the train is due to call only if its recipient specifies a different station at which the train is scheduled to call and the collector considers that such extended authority to travel is reasonable. The exact form of your conversation with the collector therefore makes a significant difference to whether the penalty fare was issued correctly or not. If you did not indicate that you wished to have authority to travel to Blackfriars (for which the penalty fare from Brighton to Blackfriars was £21.50 + £100 penalty element (subject to a £50 reduction for early payment) then the penalty fare issued to you should only have authorised travel as far as the next station at which the train was due to call.

A look at https://www.ontimetrains.co.uk/depa...rture=09:49;timeField=Departing;arrival=10:35 shows that your train was at or approaching its Haywards Heath stop when your penalty fare was issued at 09:48 on 16th January. So, unless you asked the collector to authorise travel to Blackfriars, the correct course was to authorise travel only as far as Haywards Heath for a penalty fare of £8.00 (Brighton to Haywards Heath) + £100 (again subject to a £50 reduction for early payment). The Regulations do not permit collectors to make a unilateral decision to authorise travel beyond the next scheduled station stop and consequently to charge a higher fare; they may do so on a discretionary basis, but only if the penalty fare recipient has, in some way, 'specified' a more distant station at which the train is due to call. As you say that this was not what happened in your case, you have a basis for a succesful appeal against issue of the penalty fare on the ground set out at Regulation 16(3)(a) of the 2018 Regulations, namely that “the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations” in that it authorised travel to a destination beyond the train's next scheduled calling point notwithstanding that you had made no request for such extended authority to travel.

I think @MaxM should submit an appeal on this basis - and take it through to stage 3 if needs be, as it seems like good grounds on which to submit the Appeal - I can see nothing to lose by doing so (and even if it ultimately failed it would buy time to save funds to pay any sum insisted on, if no other benefit was obtained in the end).

 

[sheff1]

And indeed Regulation 9 of the

The Railways (Penalty Fares) (Amendment) Regulations 2022​

also states the same

It actually states

if paid before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the penalty fare is charged, £50 plus the price of the full single fare applicable.

So the first of the 21 days in this case is 17th Jan with the 21st day being 6th Feb.

 

[MaxM]

The regulation relevant to your case is Regulation 5(5A) of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 (as amended), which is in the following terms:

“In respect of England, the penalty fare charged under paragraph (1) to a person travelling by or present on a train authorises a person to travel to—
(a) a station in England at which the train is due to make a scheduled call that they may specify, if the collector considers that this is reasonable in all the circumstances; or
(b) otherwise, the next station at which the train is due to make a scheduled call.”

The words I have emboldened show that a penalty fare can authorise travel beyond the next station at which the train is due to call only if its recipient specifies a different station at which the train is scheduled to call and the collector considers that such extended authority to travel is reasonable. The exact form of your conversation with the collector therefore makes a significant difference to whether the penalty fare was issued correctly or not. If you did not indicate that you wished to have authority to travel to Blackfriars (for which the penalty fare from Brighton to Blackfriars was £21.50 + £100 penalty element (subject to a £50 reduction for early payment) then the penalty fare issued to you should only have authorised travel as far as the next station at which the train was due to call.

A look at https://www.ontimetrains.co.uk/depa...rture=09:49;timeField=Departing;arrival=10:35 shows that your train was at or approaching its Haywards Heath stop when your penalty fare was issued at 09:48 on 16th January. So, unless you asked the collector to authorise travel to Blackfriars, the correct course was to authorise travel only as far as Haywards Heath for a penalty fare of £8.00 (Brighton to Haywards Heath) + £100 (again subject to a £50 reduction for early payment). The Regulations do not permit collectors to make a unilateral decision to authorise travel beyond the next scheduled station stop and consequently to charge a higher fare; they may do so on a discretionary basis, but only if the penalty fare recipient has, in some way, 'specified' a more distant station at which the train is due to call. As you say that this was not what happened in your case, you have a basis for a succesful appeal against issue of the penalty fare on the ground set out at Regulation 16(3)(a) of the 2018 Regulations, namely that “the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations” in that it authorised travel to a destination beyond the train's next scheduled calling point notwithstanding that you had made no request for such extended authority to travel.

This is great @John Palmer , thank you for you detailed research. While at no point did I specify I wanted the journey on the penalty fare to travel to London Blackfriars, he did ask me to fill in a form on his iPad with my intended station.

Could they argue against the appeal on this basis?

@WesternLancer appreciate your contribution to this too.