Penalty Fare for being on wrong train by 3 minutes - Leeds to Manchester

[wilbers]

The ticket could also show on it the same final destination that appears on the station boards.

Doing that could be problematic if the train is part-cancelled after the station the ticket is to (and hence that train should still be the one used)

 

[TheSmiths82]

I think train numbers would be a good idea. I have not travelled in France for a while, but I am pretty sure each train has a service number so it is obvious you are on the right train. I know they technically do in the UK too, but the information is not published on the advanced single tickets or at information boards. E.g UID W29785 20:54 service to Leeds.

While I would never have made this mistake if you're not familiar with train travel I can see how easy the mistake is to make. I have got on the train a couple of times in Spain but the guards have always been helpful. It just seems the UK TOCs only seem to want to prosecute people for innocent mistakes like this I think the law might need changing to stop them being so heavy handed. Surely in this case the original poster should have just been made to pay the going advance single rate for that particular journey? If this was me I would just pay the £77 but it would put me off train travel for life.

 

[sheff1]

I don't know why on this and most other similar threads many posters categorically state there are no grounds for an appeal.

Has anyone seen a notice at a station which complies with the requirements of the Penalty Fares legislation ? I know I haven't, right across the country. When I was a Leeds last week the notices did not comply. Any Penalty Fare issued for a journey from a station without compliant notices must, by definition, have been issued in contravention of the legislation and hence there are compelling grounds for appeal.

Here is what I posted on an earlier thread (emphasis mine):

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 state

6.—(1) Subject to paragraph (6), a person travelling by, present on, or leaving a train (in this regulation “the passenger”) must not be charged a penalty fare where either paragraph (2) or (3) applies.

(2) This paragraph applies if, at the time when, and at the station where, the passenger boarded the train—

a) there were no facilities in operation for the sale of a travel ticket for that passenger’s journey;

(b) the requirements for the display of notices specified in regulation 8 were not satisfied;

(c) a notice was displayed indicating that the passenger was, or persons generally were, permitted to travel by or be present on the train without having a travel ticket; or

(d) the operator of the train or the station, or a person acting or purporting to act on behalf of the operator, indicated that the passenger was, or persons generally were, permitted to travel by or be present on the train without having a travel ticket

(3) This paragraph applies if—

(a)the passenger has travelled on a preceding train;

(b)at the time when, and at the station where, the passenger boarded the first of the preceding trains, any of sub-paragraphs (a) to (d) of paragraph (2) applied; and

(c)at the time when, and at the station where, the passenger changed from any preceding train—

(i)any of sub-paragraphs (a) to (d) of paragraph (2) applied; or

(ii)the passenger did not have sufficient time between leaving one train and boarding the next to purchase a travel ticket

Display of Notices​

8.—(1) The requirements for the display of notices are as follows.

(2) Where any entrance onto a platform at the station is not the entrance to, or situated within, a compulsory ticket area, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a standard notice”) must be displayed at that entrance.

(3) If the station has one or more compulsory ticket areas, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a compulsory ticket area notice”) must be displayed at each entrance into a compulsory ticket area.

(4) Standard notices and compulsory ticket area notices must also be displayed at sufficient locations around the station so that at least one notice is readily visible to passengers prior to boarding a train at the station, including passengers changing from one train to another train.

This is the, seemingly ubiquitous , notice I photographed at the time

As can be seen the notice does not comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (as mandated in 8(2) above):

1.—(1) A standard notice must contain—
.....
(c )the wording “Please buy your ticket before you travel otherwise you may be charged a Penalty Fare”;

and hence a Penalty Fare must not be charged as per 6(1) above.

 

[Fermiboson]

The danger is that the TOC will choose to simply withdraw the PF and proceed to prosecution.

 

[Watershed]

The danger is that the TOC will choose to simply withdraw the PF and proceed to prosecution.

This is only an option before a first-stage appeal has been decided (or the 21-day deadline for a decision to be made has passed, whichever comes first).

It also seems highly unlikely that a TOC would withdraw a PF and instead prosecute, merely because a valid ground of appeal has been raised. Frankly, I don't think we have ever seen an example of this on the forum, despite advising what must amount to hundreds if not thousands of PF recipients. The TOCs simply seem too incompetent at issuing PFs to realise that they have got it wrong!

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I don't know why on this and most other similar threads many posters categorically state there are no grounds for an appeal.

Has anyone seen a notice at a station which complies with the requirements of the Penalty Fares legislation ? I know I haven't, right across the country. When I was a Leeds last week the notices did not comply. Any Penalty Fare issued for a journey from a station without compliant notices must, by definition, have been issued in contravention of the legislation and hence there are compelling grounds for appeal.

Here is what I posted on an earlier thread (emphasis mine):



This is the, seemingly ubiquitous , notice I photographed at the time

As can be seen the notice does not comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (as mandated in 8(2) above):



and hence a Penalty Fare must not be charged as per 6(1) above.

This is what I (and I suspect other contributors) think of (and describe) as a 'technical' ground of appeal - and in my view it's clear that these are not easy appeals to pursue.

Hence my comment near the beginning of the thread;

You need to know that in our experience ‘technical’ appeals only succeed at the third (final) stage of the appeal process - and there’s a fairly low success rate even at that point.

 

[island]

As can be seen the notice does not comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (as mandated in 8(2) above):


and hence a Penalty Fare must not be charged as per 6(1) above.

A solicitor who regularly posts on the forum has confirmed that this very minor difference in wording does not invalidate penalty fares, in line with the principle of de minimus non curat lex (the law does not care about trivial things).

 

[1rain]

So you'd bought this a few days in advance of travel; the ticketed train left from platform 10, destination Chester. The train you caught left platform 16 destination Manchester Airport?

What information sources precisely did you use that took you to the wrong platform? Something on your phone - what exactly? Information boards at the station - which exactly? where? what did they say?

(I'm imagining perhaps you only noticed one 'Manchester' possibility and the other wasn't shown because the train continued on to Chester? But what actually happened?)

Hi there,
I looked at the station information board and saw the departure to Manchester, at 16:45, knowing my journey was also to Manchester booked a couple minutes earlier (thought the 3 minute difference was a slight delay)
I am not too experienced in train travel, so seeing a destination to Manchester at my (assumed) correct time, and hopped on! Didn't realise it would have such bad consequences!

 

[swt_passenger]

A solicitor who regularly posts on the forum has confirmed that this very minor difference in wording does not invalidate penalty fares, in line with the principle of de minimus non curat lex (the law does not care about trivial things).

Easily fixed anyway, they just need to amend the regulations to match the signs. It will be a lot quicker than replacing thousands of signs... I suppose there really must be thousands of them, because as we know they have to be easily seen at every entrance, and within stations they must be easily seen by interchanging passengers.

 

[Fermiboson]

Hi there,
I looked at the station information board and saw the departure to Manchester, at 16:45, knowing my journey was also to Manchester booked a couple minutes earlier (thought the 3 minute difference was a slight delay)
I am not too experienced in train travel, so seeing a destination to Manchester at my (assumed) correct time, and hopped on! Didn't realise it would have such bad consequences!

Regardless of the general discussions surrounding the suitability of sanctions surrounding advance ticketing and the rail industry’s attitude towards it, the fact remains that your penalty fare is unquestionably valid under the current legislation, unless someone has filled the paperwork in wrong (hence upload the documentation you have received, suitably redacted, so we can check and advise if this is the case).

If you can’t afford to pay the penalty fare right now, and assuming there are no otherwise valid grounds for appeal, I would submit an appeal essentially asking for clemency, telling them what you have told us. If you are extraordinarily, extraordinarily lucky, they may let you off. More (overwhelmingly) likely, they will deny it, but you will have given yourself, say, two weeks to save up some extra money. As others have noted, this has the added advantage of barring the TOC from criminally prosecuting you, and freezes the clock for the prompt payment deadline.

 

[GoneSouth]

I'd prefer the term "disfunctional" rather than competitive.

I was about to post similar until I noticed your post. 100% agreement here. I haven’t seen any real competition on the routes I use, ever.

 

[Starmill]

A solicitor who regularly posts on the forum has confirmed that this very minor difference in wording does not invalidate penalty fares, in line with the principle of de minimus non curat lex (the law does not care about trivial things).

I think you're confusing how you wish the wording read with how it actually reads.

The wording visible to @sheff1 is potentially different in meaning because it says "have to pay a Penalty Fare of at least £100", even the amount which has to be paid of the Penalty Fare is usually under £100 if paid within 14 days, even if it's value is over that.

Has anyone seen a notice at a station which complies with the requirements of the Penalty Fares legislation ?

I think that I may have done yes, but unfortunately a quick search cannot prompt my memory. I'll try to remember to check again soon and will return with photographs if I do find anything different. I could easily be misremembering.

 

[island]

I think you're confusing how you wish the wording read with how it actually reads.

The wording visible to @sheff1 is potentially different in meaning because it says "have to pay a Penalty Fare of at least £100", even the amount which has to be paid of the Penalty Fare is usually under £100 if paid within 14 days, even if it's value is over that.

I’m not confusing or wishing anything, merely repeating what a wiser and better qualified soul than (you and) me has stated.

 

[Fermiboson]

I also do not think it is wise to push this legal technicality too hard. If the accepted legal position were to become that virtually all penalty fares are invalid, this would simply lead the TOCs to pursue more severe consequences for cases which would previously have been dealt with by penalty fares.

 

[SargeNpton]

Indeed, such a system already exists by virtue of the Retail Service ID (RSID) that is used in retail systems to identify services when issuing reservations. RSIDs just need to be made visible!

It's not as if using the RSID in public-facing information wasn't the idea way back when they were invented.

 

[WesternLancer]

Regardless of the general discussions surrounding the suitability of sanctions surrounding advance ticketing and the rail industry’s attitude towards it, the fact remains that your penalty fare is unquestionably valid under the current legislation, unless someone has filled the paperwork in wrong (hence upload the documentation you have received, suitably redacted, so we can check and advise if this is the case).

If you can’t afford to pay the penalty fare right now, and assuming there are no otherwise valid grounds for appeal, I would submit an appeal essentially asking for clemency, telling them what you have told us. If you are extraordinarily, extraordinarily lucky, they may let you off. More (overwhelmingly) likely, they will deny it, but you will have given yourself, say, two weeks to save up some extra money. As others have noted, this has the added advantage of barring the TOC from criminally prosecuting you, and freezes the clock for the prompt payment deadline.

I agree with this advice.

 

[furlong]

Do a "compelling reasons" appeal, arguing you had a ticket, you believed you were on the required train, and explaining how the minimal information at the station and your unfamiliarity with rail travel led to the situation. Then additionally mention it was suggested that you checked that the notices displayed comply with the regulations both in terms of the words used and the locations they've been placed and you don't think they do comply - comment specifically on whether or not you saw them and read them before you boarded.

Easily fixed anyway, they just need to amend the regulations to match the signs. It will be a lot quicker than replacing thousands of signs...

If it was that easily fixed this would already have happened. I would not expect such a change to the regulations to get approved by government lawyers because if the new wording appeared in the regulations at best that could be viewed as deliberately misleading and at worst deliberately false. The existing words were chosen for good reasons and it's disappointing that the train companies don't agree that they are required to use them.

 

[Fermiboson]

OT by miles at this point, but government lawyers have been known to authorise far more egregious falsehoods.

 

[Honestviews]

Has the Penalty fare been correctly issued? I have seen on another discussion a veteran member has said that as the person has a ticket then the PF is incorrectly issued if it states "no ticket" when in fact one was presented. They suggested that this alone should mean a successful appeal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Has the Penalty fare been correctly issued? I have seen on another discussion a veteran member has said that as the person has a ticket then the PF is incorrectly issued if it states "no ticket" when in fact one was presented. They suggested that this alone should mean a successful appeal.

In that context yes, because the NRCoT allows an excess for a wrongly routed (geographic) ticket. However I'm less sure about what should be selected in this context. Others may be able to advise.

 

[furlong]

Has the Penalty fare been correctly issued?

I don't think the ticket had been uploaded before? 'No ticket' is unlikely to matter - you can argue it's an abbreviation for "no ticket valid for the train being used". (The requirement is to provide the reason, and there'll be a lot of latitude allowed there.)

However how fast was the train going if the location of issue was Manchester Victoria at 17:18 ?
Doesn't it have other intermediate stops after that time, to which the penalty should have been issued unless the passenger explicitly asked otherwise?

So where were you when the Penalty Fare was issued? How far into the journey was it? If the notice is correct, you set off half an hour earlier than you said. If it's incorrect were you offered the choice of paying the penalty to the next station then buying a new ticket from there?

 

[Honestviews]

It was uploaded with an edit/update. It would be a very technical argument and I agree re the latitude.