Penalty Fare not on the System

[Throwaway68396]

On Thursday I got charged a penalty fare but when I typed in the reference number today nothing came up and when I called them they said it wasn't on the system. What should I do next? Does this mean I won't have to pay or should I still do something about it?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

On Thursday I got charged a penalty fare but when I typed in the reference number today nothing came up and when I called them they said it wasn't on the system. What should I do next? Does this mean I won't have to pay or should I still do something about it?

What were the circumstances of you being charged? Where did you travel from and to, and at what time? Did you hold any ticket at all? Can you upload a redacted copy of the Penalty Fare notice?

These factors will all influence whether or not the Penalty Fare was correctly issued. I suspect that for the moment the Penalty Fare is not yet on the online system so it isn't found. It will probably be added within a few days, unless the paperwork has somehow been lost.

 

[cuccir]

Hmm, this is an unusual one.

There's four likely next scenarios:
1. As ForTheLoveOf states, the Penalty Fare is just not in the system yet
2. The RPI (revenue protection inspector) made a mistake when issuing your penalty fare, there is no penalty fare to pay, you've "got off" from whatever you did!
3. The penalty fare exists but there's some error with your number. There's a danger that if you don't pay initially, the penalty fare will increase and potentially that the train company will look to prosecute you if you still don't pay
4. The train company have withdrawn the penalty fare before you had a chance to pay it, and are considering whether or not to investigate this for prosecution

I'd say it's very very likely to be numbers 1 or 2, but I'd be aware of the possibility of 3 or 4. Get screen-shots of attempting to pay and keep checking every day until the final due date! Note down the date and time of your phone conversation too so that you have some evidence that you spoke to someone about this.

If you want us to check whether we think that the Peanlty Fare was probably correctly issued, then you can respond to the questions that ForTheLoveOf has asked.

 

[Saperstein]

Hmm, this is an unusual one.

4. The train company have withdrawn the penalty fare before you had a chance to pay it, and are considering whether or not to investigate this for prosecution

But can they do this? Surely once a PF has been issued, that’s it unless the defendant fails to pay it. They (TOC) can’t just change their mind?

Unless of course further evidence comes to light meantime, but not knowing the circumstances under which the PF was issued it’s difficult to judge. (No pun intended).

 

[AlterEgo]

But can they do this? Surely once a PF has been issued, that’s it unless the defendant fails to pay it. They (TOC) can’t just change their mind?

Unless of course further evidence comes to light meantime, but not knowing the circumstances under which the PF was issued it’s difficult to judge. (No pun intended).

A PF can be withdrawn and it is not uncommon. When processing the PF onto the system, it may be apparent that the PF was issued in error, or information is incomplete or otherwise insufficient to support the PF, and the only option is to withdraw it.

 

[Saperstein]

A PF can be withdrawn and it is not uncommon. When processing the PF onto the system, it may be apparent that the PF was issued in error, or information is incomplete or otherwise insufficient to support the PF, and the only option is to withdraw it.

My point was can they withdraw it and then prosacute instead of the PF?

Sorry if I didn’t phrase that correctly

 

[jumble]

A PF can be withdrawn and it is not uncommon. When processing the PF onto the system, it may be apparent that the PF was issued in e
error, or information is incomplete or otherwise insufficient to support the PF, and the only option is to withdraw it.

To add to what Cuccir said you should make contemporaneous notes of the phone conversation as detailed as you can
( Date and time of call, what number you called, who you spoke to if they gave their name )
If you do not have the name then I would certainly ring back and ask again this time noting the name or a refusal to reveal it.
You do not want to have had a conversation with the man with the broom.


As an aside it seems to me it would be very rude to simply cancel the PF and not tell the recipient if this is the scenario.

 

[221129]

My point was can they withdraw it and then prosacute instead of the PF?

Sorry if I didn’t phrase that correctly

Yes. They can.

 

[AlterEgo]

My point was can they withdraw it and then prosacute instead of the PF?

Sorry if I didn’t phrase that correctly

Yes they can do this. (Sorry I didn't pick up the nuance in the earlier post!)

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

My point was can they withdraw it and then prosacute instead of the PF?

Sorry if I didn’t phrase that correctly

Yes. The only stage at which prosecution is entirely ruled out is if the Penalty Fare is paid, or if a first-stage appeal is lodged and either a decision has been made on the appeal, or the timeframe for a response (21 days) has passed without a decision. However, as @furlong will no doubt be able to elaborate on, once a Penalty Fare has been issued, it should only be cancelled (and replaced by prosecution) in limited circumstances - i.e. primarily where information has come to light which would have led to it not being issued, had it been known at the time. For instance, if the passenger gave journey details which were only later discovered to be false.

A Penalty Fare cancelled in circumstances other than these (and other than for non-payment as well as non-appeal) could lead to any linked prosecution being considered an unacceptable abuse of process and therefore being disallowed, as a form of settlement for the matter has already been agreed by way of the Penalty Fare (as it is always possible for the passenger to reject one, for example).

 

[Throwaway68396]

Sorry for the late response and thanks for all of your help.

The penalty fare is attached here but it still doesn't seem to be on their system, so hopefully they made a mistake or forgot to upload it. I doubt they'd prosecute anyone over just £52.50 so hopefully that's not happening.

I haven't received any word of it being cancelled so I doubt it's that.

I think I'll call them up soon again but if nothing happens should I just leave it or should I find a way to pay it despite it not being on the system yet.

 

[tony_mac]

I doubt they'd prosecute anyone over just £52.50 so hopefully that's not happening.

people are regularly prosecuted over smaller amounts.
example of a dozen or so....
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/people-caught-bath-spa-railway-1547468

 

[cuccir]

I think I'll call them up soon again but if nothing happens should I just leave it or should I find a way to pay it despite it not being on the system yet.

You've called once. If you want to contact them again you're better off emailing and getting something in writing.

Just keep checking every couple of days if you can pay online until the due date (11th July). If after that you still can't pay, you can presume that there is no penalty fare.

 

[furlong]

I'm pretty disappointed by that notice. How can it reference the 2018 regulations without unambiguously abiding by them? It's hardly rocket science!

There is no minimum to pay at the time - but that bit was ignored by the inspector anyway, 'NIL', though the inspector should have crossed out the incorrect words. If you appeal you do not have to pay anything until after your appeal has been decided.

But more importantly, arguably this requirement is not met:

5(2) Where a collector charges a penalty fare to a person under paragraph (1), the collector must provide that person with the following information in writing at the time the penalty fare is charged—
...
(h) a statement that the person must either pay, or appeal against, the penalty fare within 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the penalty fare is charged;

Rather the notice contains an incorrect statement that the person must pay the penalty fare within 21 days "separate from any appeal you may wish to make". And further states "The sending of an appeal does not negate your liability to pay the outstanding amount by the date specified."

There was a government consultation to address precisely this point and it is especially disappointing to read here that one of the train companies appears to have decided to defy the government's decision to "stop the clock" during appeals.

Perhaps you should continue with your efforts to pay this in full directly in accordance with the notice you were issued, but then, after having paid, appeal on two separate grounds - one unconnected with the notice itself, for example, that the signage at Clapham Junction is not compliant if you believe that to be the case (read the regulations and look at where the posters have been placed compared with where they should be), and one that the notice did not comply with the regulations and you should not have been required to make that payment until after you had exhausted your right of appeal. (The second argument may be stronger if you have paid in accordance with incorrect information you were given and have made an appeal on separate grounds. Otherwise they can try to say, "yes, it didn't comply, but it made no difference to you so it doesn't matter".)

And of course never make another rail journey without buying the correct ticket again - if they catch you again, they might decide that they need the assistance of a criminal court to help you to learn your lesson!

 

[furlong]

There might be another problem here too. How difficult is it to multiply by 2? I see a single from Clapham Junction to Brighton at 26.10 which, doubled, would be 52.20 not 52.10. That might also provide similar grounds for appeal:

(3) The grounds on which an appeal under this regulation may be made are that—
(a) the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations;

(There are some other bits of the notice that might also be judged not to comply with the regulations.)

 

[furlong]

Just keep checking every couple of days if you can pay online until the due date (11th July). If after that you still can't pay, you can presume that there is no penalty fare.

No - it's the recipient's responsibility either to pay it or to appeal, though incorrect information on the notice about how to pay it might itself provide successful grounds for an appeal.
But send a cheque as described on the notice (keep a copy and get a certificate of posting or use a signed for service), and then make an appeal on some of the grounds suggested above.

Off-topic for this thread, but a small correction:

a form of settlement for the matter has already been agreed by way of the Penalty Fare (as it is always possible for the passenger to reject one, for example).

The passenger has no right to reject a (correctly-issued) Penalty Fare.

 

[furlong]

incorrect information on the notice about how to pay it might itself provide successful grounds for an appeal

"The notice said I could pay by... I followed those instructions at <date/time> by doing... and again at.... I also tried... and ... Ultimately, I concluded the explanation on the notice of how the penalty fare may be paid was untrue.. As the Regulations state that the collector must provide an explanation of how the penalty fare may be paid in writing, but it could not in fact be paid according to it, I believe that the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations."

 

[najaB]

Sorry for the late response and thanks for all of your help.

The penalty fare is attached here...

The box ticked appears to be for an adult travelling on a child ticket, is that correct?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I agree with furlong. This is a shocker of a Penalty Fare, with at least 4 possible grounds of appeal:

1. The amount is incorrect
2. The notice incorrectly claims you must pay even if you wish to appeal
3. The notice does not give correct details of how to pay or appeal
4. GTR's Penalty Fare signage does not comply with the Regulation

I will draft an appeal on these four grounds later.

 

[robbeech]

I agree with furlong. This is a shocker of a Penalty Fare, with at least 4 possible grounds of appeal:

1. The amount is incorrect
2. The notice incorrectly claims you must pay even if you wish to appeal
3. The notice does not give correct details of how to pay or appeal
4. GTR's Penalty Fare signage does not comply with the Regulation

I will draft an appeal on these four grounds later.

I have absolutely no way to accurately identify the person who issued it. I wouldn’t want to make a personal comment about someone's Hand writing as there could be a justifiable reason why it is poor but i wouldn’t like to rely on guessing their details from those numbers either.

 

[some bloke]

send a cheque as described on the notice (keep a copy and get a certificate of posting or use a signed for service), and then make an appeal on some of the grounds suggested above.

While the errors on the notice might be shocking, as @Throwaway68396 has a couple of weeks it might end up saving effort if she contacts GTR again, to confirm whether she does need to pay or if they are willing to say there is no need.

Perhaps it hasn't got into the system to enable it to be registered as paid even by cheque.

It's lawful to record a phone call if you get permission beforehand. You can then say, "OK, so I've started recording the conversation as we agreed - could you just confirm that you've given permission?". In this case you wouldn't need to ask until/unless they say you don't need to pay. If they do say that, it would in any case seem reasonable to ask them to confirm it in writing before the deadline.

 

[some bloke]

it might end up saving effort if she contacts GTR again

Is the thinking behind sending a cheque, or part of the thinking, to avoid the possibility that questioning GTR again might lead to prosecution (bearing in mind what @ForTheLoveOf says above on abuse of process)?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Here is a draft appeal. You will need to fill in the parts in bold with the correct details.

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am hereby submitting an appeal against Penalty Fare no. XXXXXXX on the the following five grounds.

1) Regulation 9(1) of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 ("the Regulations") requires that the amount of a Penalty Fare be "£20 or twice the full single fare applicable, whichever is greater". There is only one single fare from Clapham Junction to Brighton - the Anytime Day Single, route "not via London", priced at £26.10. Twice this fare is £52.20, so therefore this would be the correct amount of the Penalty Fare.

However, the Penalty Fare has not been issued for this amount - it has instead been charged for the amount of £52.10. It is not within the remit of the operator or the appeals body to alter the amount of the Penalty Fare after it has been issued.

Accordingly, Regulation 9(1) was not complied with, and consequently this appeal must be allowed because, as per Regulation 16(3)(a), the Penalty Fare has not been charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.

2) Regulation 5(2) requires that a passenger is provided with certain information in writing when they are charged a Penalty Fare. Subparagraph (h) requires that this include "a statement that the person must either pay, or appeal against, the penalty fare within 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the penalty fare is charged". However, the Penalty Fare does not contain any such statement, and instead grossly misrepresents the legal position, claiming that:

"The minimum you must pay at the time of issue is the full single fare for the journey you have made. If you do not pay the outstanding amount within 21 days, starting on the day after issue an administration fee of £20 will be charged and legal proceedings may be issued against you. This is separate from any appeal you may wish to make."

Accordingly, I was not provided with the information required to be provided by Regulation 5(2)(h), and consequently this appeal must be allowed because, as per Regulation 16(3)(a), the Penalty Fare has not been charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.

3) Similar to the second ground of appeal, Regulation 5(2)(i) requires that a passenger is provided, in writing, with "an explanation of how the penalty fare may be paid". The Notice contains a website, epfn.penaltyfares.co.uk, and a contact number, 0870 067 8171, either of which it is stated one can use to pay the Penalty Fare.

I followed those instructions at <date/time> but the website did not recognise the Penalty Fare reference number. I tried calling the contact number at <date/time> but there too I was told that the Penalty Fare did not exist in their systems. I tried the website again at <date/time> but it still did not let me pay. I can come to no other conclusion than that the purported explanation on the notice of how the Penalty Fare may be paid, is untrue and/or inaccurate.

Accordingly, I was therefore not provided with the information required to be provided by Regulation 5(2)(i), and consequently this appeal must be allowed because, as per Regulation 16(3)(a), the Penalty Fare has not been charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.

(4) Regulation 8(2) requires that:

"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."

The general template which the operator uses for their Penalty Fare warning signage does not comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1. This is because it does not comply with paragraph 1(1)(c) of that Part, which requires that "A standard notice must contain the wording "Please buy your ticket before you travel otherwise you may be charged a Penalty Fare"". This exact wording, as required by the Regulations, simply is not present on the signage.

Similarly, the signage does not comply with paragraph 1(1)(d), which requires that "A standard notice must contain the wording "A Penalty Fare is £20 or twice the full single fare applicable to your journey (whichever is greater)"". This exact wording, as required by the Regulations, simply is not present on the template.

Accordingly, Regulation 8(2) was not complied with, and consequently this appeal must be allowed because, as per Regulation 16(3)(a), the Penalty Fare has not been charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.

(5) Regulation 8(4) requires that:

"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."

I have no recollection of having seen any such notice prior to boarding the train at the station. The operator is put to strict proof that signage was displayed at sufficient locations such as to be readily visible prior to boarding the train.

Accordingly, Regulation 8(4) was not complied with, and consequently this appeal must be allowed because, as per Regulation 16(3)(a), the Penalty Fare has not been charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations.

I await your response confirming that you have allowed this appeal.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

It's lawful to record a phone call if you get permission beforehand. You can then say, "OK, so I've started recording the conversation as we agreed - could you just confirm that you've given permission?". In this case you wouldn't need to ask until/unless they say you don't need to pay. If they do say that, it would in any case seem reasonable to ask them to confirm it in writing before the deadline.

Individuals don't need permission to record phone calls. If you try this, it is highly likely you will simply have the phone hung up on you. Whilst a Court might, in theory, view it in somewhat poor taste to record without prior notification, there is no expectation of privacy for a potentially legally significant conversation which will inevitably already be being recorded by the company, and it is extremely unlikely that important conversations would be disallowed as evidence.

 

[30907]

Unless the OP wishes to pursue an appeal on any or all of the technical grounds proposed by ForTheLoveOf, they are able to pay by the postal route given on the PFN, and I would suggest doing that if the online method continues to fail.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Unless the OP wishes to pursue an appeal on any or all of the technical grounds proposed by ForTheLoveOf, they are able to pay by the postal route given on the PFN, and I would suggest doing that if the online method continues to fail.

I would go so far as to say it would be remiss not to appeal - regardless of the grounds one uses. One could even just make an appeal saying something flippant like "I don't find it fair" and that would suffice; as long as the Penalty Fare is not withdrawn before the appeal is decided on, then as soon as the decision is made, or the 21 days for this to be done pass without a decision, the OP is statute barred from being prosecuted. This is a very valuable protection which it is worth availing oneself of, in my view.

 

[Kite159]

Just send a cheque and put the matter of being caught using a child ticket to try and reduce the cost of travelling behind you, and in future pay the correct fare. How hard can it be to pay the correct fare?

No doubt the usual suspects who support fare dodgers will attempt to get you off the hook...

In an ideal world, penalty fares will be scrapped and you will be having a day out in court, with trying to explain to a judge why you decided to attempt to travel on a kids ticket

 

[Llanigraham]

Individuals don't need permission to record phone calls. If you try this, it is highly likely you will simply have the phone hung up on you. Whilst a Court might, in theory, view it in somewhat poor taste to record without prior notification, there is no expectation of privacy for a potentially legally significant conversation which will inevitably already be being recorded by the company, and it is extremely unlikely that important conversations would be disallowed as evidence.

I think you will find that if you haven't informed the person that you intend to record the call then it cannot be used as evidence. Plus it has to have been recorded in a manner that does not allow tampering with it.

 

[Saperstein]

Just send a cheque and put the matter of being caught using a child ticket to try and reduce the cost of travelling behind you, and in future pay the correct fare. How hard can it be to pay the correct fare?

No doubt the usual suspects who support fare dodgers will attempt to get you off the hook...

In an ideal world, penalty fares will be scrapped and you will be having a day out in court, with trying to explain to a judge why you decided to attempt to travel on a kids ticket

What’s the problem? She asked a question that’s all.

OK, maybe she did buy a childs ticket deliberately, or maybe it was a mistake, you and I don’t know for certain.

I don't normally pass comment on things like this but this one’s got to me a bit.

She’s been penalty fared at Brighton. She’s gutted. The last thing she needs is that kind
of attitude when she asks a civil question.

And as for the “usual suspects attempting to get you [Her] off the hook” I thought that that is what this part of the forum is all about, giving advice?

With all due respect, if you don’t like reading about this subject please don’t read this section of the forum!

 

[tony_mac]

I think you will find that if you haven't informed the person that you intend to record the call then it cannot be used as evidence. Plus it has to have been recorded in a manner that does not allow tampering with it.

Heading wildly off-topic, but at least one High Court judge disagrees with you.

In this case however I have the direct evidence of the recordings made by the claimant. It is true to say that these must be approached with some caution, as there is always a risk that where one party knows a conversation is being recorded but the other does not the content may be manipulated with a view to drawing the party who is unaware into some statement that can be taken out of context. But there can be great value in what is said in such circumstances, where the parties plainly know the truth of the matters they are discussing and are talking (at least on one side) freely about them.