Penalty Fare Notice - Advice needed after 3 failed appeals

[77sj77]

I have recently been issued a Penalty Fare Notice by Northern Trains for not having a ticket before my journey CFD to LDS.
On the day of travel i attempted to buy a ticket from their machine at CFD, but it would not connect to my phone for payment (the machine does not accept cash). I asked the train guard if i could purchase a ticket from him and he said he would sell me one on the train. Unfortunately he did not get to me before the journey ended (it was a short journey approx 20mins). I attempted to purchase a ticket at the destination station LDS where i was interrupted and issued a Penalty Fare Notice.

I am not a frequent train user and was not aware of the rule changes, although there was signage, but i didn't see it. Or the need to get a promise-to-pay ticket or where to get one from.

I have explained this in 3 appeals, but Northern and their supposedly independent appeals service are adamant that the Penalty Fare Notice should stand and haven't even attempted to address my reasons for appeal in their responses just point blank responses telling me i must have a ticket before travel. I believe that there were mitigating circumstances:
1. I attempted to pay 3 times and wasn't trying to dodge the fare.
2. I was allowed to board by a Northern Employee.
3. Their machine doesn't accept cash when Northern Trains list this as a valid form of payment.

Now that i have exhausted my appeals i suppose the next step would small claims court or a tribunal. Has anyone had any experience of this and have any advice or should i just bite the bullet and pay the fine?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

 

[jfollows]

CFD is Castleford, presumably. And LDS Leeds likewise.
1. Failure to buy a ticket won't be an excuse.
3. Does the machine issue a "promise to pay" in lieu of cash? If so, not having this will not be an excuse either.
You don't need to do anything if you don't pay, you will presumably be taken to court and will be able to defend yourself there.
However, if you were allowed to board the train without a ticket and told that you could buy the ticket on the train sounds perfectly reasonable to me, you might want to ensure that you (or Northern) know who the person was who gave you this authorisation now rather than running into an excuse of "lost records" or "too long ago" in due course.

See https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e...572570/National_Rail_Conditions_of_Travel.pdf

• You must hold a valid Ticket or authority to travel before you board a train where there was the opportunity to buy one unless one of the following circumstances applies:
  • 6.1.1 At the station where you start your journey, there is no means of purchasing a Ticket, either because there is no Ticket office open or a self-service Ticket machine is not in working order, or will not accept your only available method of payment (card or cash); and where notices indicate that Penalty Fares may apply from that station, you purchase a Permit to Travel if there is a working Permit to Travel issuing machine at the station where you start your journey – see Condition 10 for more information about Penalty Fares; or
  • 6.1.2 The station is staffed, and you are specifically permitted to board a train service by an authorised member of staff, or you have received a written notice or heard an audible announcement to this effect; or

 

[Watershed]

As the Penalty Fare has been appealed (without being withdrawn prior to a decision being reached), the law forbids Northern from bringing a prosecution in relation to this case. That's not to say they won't try nevertheless - I'm sure @KirkstallOne could tell you about their experience in this respect - but they would be breaking the law in doing so.

The fact that the guard gave you permission to board the train means you have a defence to any alleged offence (for example under Railway Byelaw 18). Furthermore it also means you were not liable to pay a Penalty Fare, although the appeals body sadly do not appear to have taken this point onboard. I realise it's little help in retrospect, but for reference - we may have been able to assist you in drafting an appeal with a higher chance of success (as sometimes it is necessary to cite the specific Regulations under which one is appealing).

In any event, if you intended to pay by cash (with the machine not accepting cash or your card) you were entitled to buy your ticket onboard the train. Whilst there is a grey area surrounding liability for a Penalty Fare if you don't obtain a Promise to Pay Notice, there is no question regarding criminal liability since there is similarly a defence to any offence under Byelaw 18 in these circumstances (which does not rely on obtaining a Promise to Pay Notice).

 

[WesternLancer]

I have recently been issued a Penalty Fare Notice by Northern Trains for not having a ticket before my journey CFD to LDS.
On the day of travel i attempted to buy a ticket from their machine at CFD, but it would not connect to my phone for payment (the machine does not accept cash). I asked the train guard if i could purchase a ticket from him and he said he would sell me one on the train. Unfortunately he did not get to me before the journey ended (it was a short journey approx 20mins). I attempted to purchase a ticket at the destination station LDS where i was interrupted and issued a Penalty Fare Notice.

I am not a frequent train user and was not aware of the rule changes, although there was signage, but i didn't see it. Or the need to get a promise-to-pay ticket or where to get one from.

I have explained this in 3 appeals, but Northern and their supposedly independent appeals service are adamant that the Penalty Fare Notice should stand and haven't even attempted to address my reasons for appeal in their responses just point blank responses telling me i must have a ticket before travel. I believe that there were mitigating circumstances:
1. I attempted to pay 3 times and wasn't trying to dodge the fare.
2. I was allowed to board by a Northern Employee.
3. Their machine doesn't accept cash when Northern Trains list this as a valid form of payment.

Now that i have exhausted my appeals i suppose the next step would small claims court or a tribunal. Has anyone had any experience of this and have any advice or should i just bite the bullet and pay the fine?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Sadly this is going to be a tricky one for you, despite @Watershed v well informed post above.

They don't care if you did not read the small print on signage. By not getting a promise to pay slip from the machine you have little defense as far as they are concerned.

If you got on the train but then did not immediately go to the guard to buy the ticket he said he could sell you (not that you are obliged to do this) you have another problem in practical terms.

If they try to pursue it to court then it will cost you more than the £50 penalty - and I suspect you have no proof that the guard told you this (I am not saying they did not but I doubt they will attend court as a witness to support your claim, or provide a written statement to that effect - chances are they will just claim they don't recall saying that, I do not think you can rely on that).

The Appeal process does not seem to be about appealing to the sense of fairness of the appeal panel - appeals would have to be based on certain criteria and the inability to pay with cash is one of them of course, which is why the Northern machines have this complex process to get a 'Promise to Pay' slip from them, which of course you did not know about.

I fear the 'least worst' option is to pay the Penalty Fare in time to obtain the 50% discount for prompt payment. Otherwise you would have to engage in debate with Northern along the lines watershed outlines I guess.

Welcome to the govt's hostile environment policy for train travelers that they want to be pursued by the operating companies - in this case one run by the govt itself.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Had you found this site earlier we could have made you aware of a deficiency in the Penalty Fare notices that might have resulted in a different result. We’re aware that appeals that have raised this point have been accepted, but without specifically acknowledging the deficiency (so not to set a precedent).

Now the final appeal has been rejected I don’t know whether there is any opportunity to raise this point. If you waited until they attempt to recover the money in a civil case, it’s doubtful whether it would be successful, as the argument might be that you should have raised it earlier.

 

[KirkstallOne]

As the Penalty Fare has been appealed (without being withdrawn prior to a decision being reached), the law forbids Northern from bringing a prosecution in relation to this case. That's not to say they won't try nevertheless - I'm sure @KirkstallOne could tell you about their experience in this respect - but they would be breaking the law in doing so.

The fact that the guard gave you permission to board the train means you have a defence to any alleged offence (for example under Railway Byelaw 18). Furthermore it also means you were not liable to pay a Penalty Fare, although the appeals body sadly do not appear to have taken this point onboard. I realise it's little help in retrospect, but for reference - we may have been able to assist you in drafting an appeal with a higher chance of success (as sometimes it is necessary to cite the specific Regulations under which one is appealing).

In any event, if you intended to pay by cash (with the machine not accepting cash or your card) you were entitled to buy your ticket onboard the train. Whilst there is a grey area surrounding liability for a Penalty Fare if you don't obtain a Promise to Pay Notice, there is no question regarding criminal liability since there is similarly a defence to any offence under Byelaw 18 in these circumstances (which does not rely on obtaining a Promise to Pay Notice).

Thanks for the mention @Watershed.

Unfortunately it is Northern’s policy to commence criminal proceedings for unpaid penalty fares that have been appealed despite this being wholly unlawful. If it remains unpaid expect to receive a series of letters threatening prosecution accompanied by escalating demands for an out if court settlement. You can read how this panned out in my thread here:

Section 5(1) RoRA Prosecution

I am being prosecuted for a journey between Kirkstall Forge and Leeds last year. I attempted to purchase a ticket on the platform but the machine froze as soon as I hit Quick Buy and was completely unresponsive for a minute or so with just part of the user interface displayed on the screen. I...

www.railforums.co.uk

I have a live complaint with Northern about their unlawful prosecution policy that has recently gained the attention of my MP so I strongly hope in the long term they will be dissuaded from persisting with this policy. However, that is of no use to you in the present.

I suggest emailing the Northern DRPU directly to register your dissatisfaction with the handling of your penalty fare and pre-empting any prosecution attempt by saying you now regard this as a civil matter and are ready and willing to have the matter examined on the balance of probabilities in the county court. I suspect they will fold like a weak paper towel.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I'll also add a vote for 'it's time to pay up'. My reasoning is

- for all practical purposes you have exhausted the appeals process - there's nowhere for it to go after the third appeal. In theory, you might be able to consider Judicial Review and argue that the appeal process was so flawed that the decision was wrong. But in practice that's not cheap and it's unlikely that a lawyer would take it on for free in the public interest.
- my understanding is that while each stage of the appeal is live, the clock on the amount of the penalty fare (£50 rather than £100 for prompt payment, in both cases plus the actual fare) stops running. You may be in time to only have to pay the £50 - and if you need to pay, it's better to pay less rather than more.
- as noted above, Northern have form for taking matters further. This includes form for trying to use the criminal courts when the penalty fare laws specifically block this so if they tried that you would win, but not without some hassle. But I think they could take you to the county (i.e. civil) court to recover the debt (£100 plus real fare): I am not familiar with how the county court works (I am not a lawyer, etc.) but it seems to me that the county court will only be interested in whether the debt is legally due (which it is) rather than the debt is fair.

If you continue to challenge things, you might win or you might not: but you are guaranteed considerable stress. Unless this has become a matter of principle that you are prepared to spend time, stress and money on with no guarantee of winning, the sensible decision is to concede now and move on.

 

[WesternLancer]

I would add that I would advise the OP, in all future cases where it can apply, however small the sum owed, makes sure to always claim things like Delay-Repay compensation to ensure that the railway pays the OP what they are due, and in so doing they claim back what they regard as an unfair Penalty Fare.

 

[furlong]

but it seems to me that the county court will only be interested in whether the debt is legally due (which it is)

With respect, the court would determine whether or not it is "legally due" - the OP contends that it is not.

 

[scrapy]

With respect, the court would determine whether or not it is "legally due" - the OP contends that it is not.

My guess is the county court would automatically conclude that the debt is legally due to penalty fare legislation and the fact that the appeals process has been exhausted. The OP would have to put a very convincing argument that the appeals process was flawed which would probably require the assistance of an expensive legal team and even then I have my doubts it would be successful. Unfortunately I think those suggesting that the OP simply pays the £50 before it increases are correct in that it will be the least painful option financially for the OP even if they feel it isnt morally right.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

With respect, the court would determine whether or not it is "legally due" - the OP contends that it is not.

My guess is the county court would automatically conclude that the debt is legally due to penalty fare legislation and the fact that the appeals process has been exhausted. The OP would have to put a very convincing argument that the appeals process was flawed which would probably require the assistance of an expensive legal team and even then I have my doubts it would be successful. Unfortunately I think those suggesting that the OP simply pays the £50 before it increases are correct in that it will be the least painful option financially for the OP even if they feel it isnt morally right.

Thanks - what I had been trying to say but didn’t really manage.

 

[deltic]

Is this not a case to take to the Rail Ombudsman although they seem to have a reputation for taking the business' side.

 

[AlterEgo]

My guess is the county court would automatically conclude that the debt is legally due to penalty fare legislation and the fact that the appeals process has been exhausted. The OP would have to put a very convincing argument that the appeals process was flawed which would probably require the assistance of an expensive legal team and even then I have my doubts it would be successful. Unfortunately I think those suggesting that the OP simply pays the £50 before it increases are correct in that it will be the least painful option financially for the OP even if they feel it isnt morally right.

I would tend to agree with this.

 

[island]

My guess is the county court would automatically conclude that the debt is legally due to penalty fare legislation and the fact that the appeals process has been exhausted. The OP would have to put a very convincing argument that the appeals process was flawed which would probably require the assistance of an expensive legal team and even then I have my doubts it would be successful. Unfortunately I think those suggesting that the OP simply pays the £50 before it increases are correct in that it will be the least painful option financially for the OP even if they feel it isnt morally right.

I would also concur with this from a theoretical standpoint and recommend the penalty be paid. I would however point out that civil proceedings to recover unpaid penalty fares are all but unheard of – as mentioned above it tends to be (unlawful) criminal proceedings. Or debt collectors.

 

[thejuggler]

"What is a Promise to Pay notice?​

A Promise to Pay notice is a ticket that must be obtained from our ticket vending machines if customers do not have the facility to pay by credit/debit card. The Promise to Pay notice allows customers to board the train with the intention of exchanging the notice at the first opportunity with a revenue officer, or at the next available booking office."

Like everything Northern this message is a mess.

If I have a wallet full of debit and credit cards which are all duplicated on Apple/Google pay I have plenty of "facility to pay by card", so on reading that use of PTP if their TVM fails isn't necessary.

I'm also sure PTP signs used to state they were for those who ONLY had cash and no card facility.

 

[SteveM70]

"What is a Promise to Pay notice?​

A Promise to Pay notice is a ticket that must be obtained from our ticket vending machines if customers do not have the facility to pay by credit/debit card. The Promise to Pay notice allows customers to board the train with the intention of exchanging the notice at the first opportunity with a revenue officer, or at the next available booking office."

Like everything Northern this message is a mess.

If I have a wallet full of debit and credit cards which are all duplicated on Apple/Google pay I have plenty of "facility to pay by card", so on reading that use of PTP if their TVM fails isn't necessary.

I'm also sure PTP signs used to state they were for those who ONLY had cash and no card facility.

Their website is ever more confused.

My understanding had always been that PTP was only ever required for those intending to pay by cash and being unable to do so

 

[77sj77]

Thanks everyone for your responses. The information given has been really useful.
As mentioned in a few responses above my defense would likely revolve around Byelaw 18 and without a witness statement or any other evidence the conversation took place its unlikely to be successful.
Although i am not adverse to defending a case to court, with reasonable success and i do think i have some legal arguments, I think in this case i may have to suck it up and pay the penalty fare!

I am happy to post the redacted (with personal details removed) correspondence should anyone wish to analyse it and hopefully help someone out in the future.

 

[scrapy]

Is this not a case to take to the Rail Ombudsman although they seem to have a reputation for taking the business' side.

Possibly, although unlike a penalty fare appeal the 21 day clock doesn't stop whilst the ombudsman considers the case. Therefore I would recommend that the £50 is paid, and then a refund is requested should the ombudsman find in the OPs favour.

 

[londonbridge]

CFD is Castleford, presumably. And LDS Leeds likewise.
1. Failure to buy a ticket won't be an excuse.
3. Does the machine issue a "promise to pay" in lieu of cash? If so, not having this will not be an excuse either.
You don't need to do anything if you don't pay, you will presumably be taken to court and will be able to defend yourself there.
However, if you were allowed to board the train without a ticket and told that you could buy the ticket on the train sounds perfectly reasonable to me, you might want to ensure that you (or Northern) know who the person was who gave you this authorisation now rather than running into an excuse of "lost records" or "too long ago" in due course.

See https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e...572570/National_Rail_Conditions_of_Travel.pdf

• You must hold a valid Ticket or authority to travel before you board a train where there was the opportunity to buy one unless one of the following circumstances applies:
  • 6.1.1 At the station where you start your journey, there is no means of purchasing a Ticket, either because there is no Ticket office open or a self-service Ticket machine is not in working order, or will not accept your only available method of payment (card or cash); and where notices indicate that Penalty Fares may apply from that station, you purchase a Permit to Travel if there is a working Permit to Travel issuing machine at the station where you start your journey – see Condition 10 for more information about Penalty Fares; or
  • 6.1.2 The station is staffed, and you are specifically permitted to board a train service by an authorised member of staff, or you have received a written notice or heard an audible announcement to this effect; or

I always understood it was if the machines wouldn't accept your preferred method of payment and that you were under no obligation to buy a ticket or promise to pay if you intended to use cash which was not accepted.

 

[island]

I always understood it was if the machines wouldn't accept your preferred method of payment and that you were under no obligation to buy a ticket or promise to pay if you intended to use cash which was not accepted.

This has been discussed in detail in the past and I don't think there is a consensus. Certainly I would expect if a court were faced with a defendant charged with fare evasion who admitted to having a wallet full of plastic that he could have used, but just tried it on intending to pay cash only if challenged, that that court would convict. At the opposite end, someone possessed of enough cash for their journey and a card that had money for the fare but where most/all of that money was expected to leave the next day by direct debit would be a lot less likely to be convicted.

The majority of passengers will of course sit somewhere on the continuum, but "I want to pay cash" isn't a catch-all immunity.

 

[Brissle Girl]

And it’s not just a wallet full of plastic either. I expect many of those seeking to use cash have a mobile payment facility too.