Please help, northern rail court threat

[dragongsd]

Hi, first I'd like to give you details of the situation.
I have only just turned 18.

For a little bit of background, I hold a 16-18 travel pass. This was active for me until the 31st of last month, which was a month after this incident. The pass was still active.
Travel South Yorkshire had recently sent out Zoom travel passes to all holder of 16-18 passes, I read the letter and it was something about encouraging travel after covid.
I presumed the pass replaced all the functionality of the old one, but I was wrong. It only gives you a concession fare on busses and trams. I did not know this at the time.
While my 16-18 travel pass was active, I had lost it. I did not want to pay the 7 pounds for another one because I thought the zoom travel pass replaced it and I'd be able to
use that instead.

Anyway, on the 30th of June I tried buying a train ticket at the station. As typical, the contactless reader was not working, so I had to (hastily) download the app and
buy one off my phone instead. I ended up buying the ticket, but since I couldn't find the zoom pass on the screen I tried selecting the 16-18 one instead.
I didn't have my pass on me so I wasn't really sure of the name of it. Turns out I accidentally selected a "16-17 saver" pass instead. The price of the fare was the same
even though I selected the wrong pass, so I paid the same fare as I would if I had selected the right one.

To stress this again, even though I selected the wrong pass, the fare would have been the EXACT SAME. The cards offer the exact same 50% concession.

Well the ticket inspector came around and I got in trouble. Found out my zoom pass wasn't even valid until august (another stupid mistake on my part) and gave him my details.

Well, a letter came through the post telling me I had "avoided paying a full fare with intent to avoid that fare" and now i'm being told to pay a 95 pound fine or face going to court and getting a criminal record.

Even through my stupid string of errors, the only thing I can see as really having done wrong is select the wrong pass and not get a replacement pass. I managed to provide them proof over email but only got automated responses which is kind of astounding considering they are playing with someones future over a matter that hasn't even resulted in a loss for them.

Anyway, do you think they have any chance of appealing this? They only gave me two weeks to pay the fine and they barely respond over email, and the only other line of contact is through post which I can only imagine would be even worse. I really don't want to pay this fine because even though I was a bit of an idiot that day (sleep deprived and in a rush), I didn't avoid paying any fare that I would have otherwise had to have paid. I didn't have my pass on me at the time but I don't think this should matter as long as you can prove that you have a valid pass.

I understand northern rail are very strict when it comes to things like this. Even if I'm unlikely to be convincted of anything I'd rather pay the fine than go to court. I just wanted to know your opinion on if they have any chance of being able to do anything,

Thanks

 

[skyhigh]

The basic rule of using a railcard is that you need to have the railcard on you when you travel. This goes for any type of railcard. If you've lost the 16-18 South Yorks pass, then you have to pay full fare until you get a replacement.

They're offering you an out of court settlement, so there's no appeals process. You can ask them to reconsider, but they are able to proceed straight to court if they so desire. I think you've complicated things by selecting the wrong railcard in the app - the South Yorks pass is fairly clearly named, and the 16-17 Saver gives discounts nationally rather than just in the SY area, so I can see why they'd be a bit suspicious.

If they look to prosecute under the Railway Byelaws, they only need to show you travelled on an invalid ticket, which you did. It's called a strict liability offence- they don't have to prove you intended to pay less than you had to.

Personally, I'd pay the settlement as if they take you to court they'll will likely win and a fine from the court will cost you more.

Even if I'm unlikely to be convincted of anything I'd rather pay the fine than go to court. I just wanted to know your opinion on if they have any chance of being able to do anything,

You didn't have a valid ticket, so you are likely to be convicted and they regularly do take people to court

 

[Hadders]

Welcome to the forum!

This is an unfortunate incident but strictly speaking you didn't have a valid ticket to travel on the train which is a criminal offence. Personally I would pay what they are asking to prevent the matter from escalating as the last thing you need is for this to end up in the magistrates court. Once the matter is settled I'd then write to customer services at Northern and see if they are prepared to refund anything. They might possibly send you some rail travel vouchers.

 

[RPI]

Having read your very detailed post, let me check I've got this right.
You've been issued a 16-18 South Yorkshire pass which gives you a 50% discount, the same as the 16-17 saver, BUT your 16-18 pass isn't valid yet?
If the 16-18 pass was valid and you had paid exactly the same fare as you would have done then I would attempt to appeal to their better nature pointing out that you had paid exactly the same fare (unless your journey went outside of the area where the 16-18 pass was valid), however, if the 16-18 pass ISN'T yet valid then you haven't paid exactly the same fare as you were entitled and you have inadvertently avoided your correct fare, in which case it may be advisable to pay the settlement, obviously its your right to go to court and argue your case but in doing so you would need to consider the extra potential costs and possible criminal record.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

its your right to go to court and argue your case but in doing so you would need to consider the extra potential costs and possible criminal record.

While the OP has the right to have the case heard in court, then given that it seems to be the case that the ticket bought was not the ticket that would have been valid with the pass that they may have held, then by the letter of the law* the OP is guilty of an offence. The OP would have to be very persuasive to convince the magistrates of the merits of their case, and very lucky to find magistrates who were prepared to set aside the letter of the law even if they were persuaded. I won't say that this is an impossible result, but it's not a very likely one.

To put it a bit more briefly, going to court and hoping to win is a very long shot. Accepting Northern's offer to let the OP pay £95 is certain to bring the matter to an end, and is likely to be cheaper than paying the fine, plus compensation, plus court fees, plus Northern's court costs that would be the result of going to court and losing. The OP might get lucky and walk away from court not having to pay anything, but the odds are against it.

*That law being byelaw 18(1): 'In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.' Note that the law doesn't say anything about whether you were intending to pay less than you should or not.

 

[30907]

I managed to provide them proof over email but only got automated responses which is kind of astounding considering they are playing with someones future over a matter that hasn't even resulted in a loss for them.

Even a conviction under the Bylaws won't affect your future, and Northern are offering to settle.

 

[pelli]

So the main point is that you used to have a Zoom 16-18 Travel Pass that would have been valid for a discount (50% off Northern trains) on your journey on 30th June, but you had lost it. A smaller additional issue is that you bought a 50% off ticket by choosing a 16-17 Saver Railcard discount instead of the Zoom 16-18 Travel Pass discount (assuming that you journey was on an eligible train), but even if you had selected the "correct" discount your ticket would still have been invalid since you did not have the Travel Pass with you.

The other details of your story seem less relevant: Your Zoom 16-18 Travel Pass was about to expire, on 31th July, and you had a Zoom Beyond 18-21 Travel Pass that would become valid from 1st August. You were not aware that it was not yet valid, nor that it would not be valid for 50% off train tickets, which might explain why you didn't get the lost 16-18 pass replaced for a £7 fee. At the station Ticket Vending Machine, you selected a ticket with a Zoom 16-18 Travel Pass discount, but the machine's card reader did not work, so you gave up and used an app on your phone instead. In the Northern Rail app list of railcards, the "16-17 Saver" is shown at the top, while you have to scroll down to "S" for the "South Yorkshire 16-18 Travel Pass", which might explain why you couldn't find it.

I note that the Zoom 16-18 Travel Pass web page Benefits section states that "Please be aware that no pass means that you could pay full fare."

I also note that Northern state that if you forget your railcard and are asked to purchase a new ticket or pay an excess, then you can get the extra cost refunded if you send them images of your original ticket, your valid railcard, and the new ticket/excess. This does not quite apply to your situation since your Zoom Travel Pass is not quite a Railcard, you selected the wrong type of discount (but same value), you have actually lost the card and presumably cannot find it again, and you have received a letter threating prosecution if you do not pay £95 rather than been asked to just pay for a new ticket. However, it implies that, as Hadders suggests, once you settle the matter by paying £95, if you email customer services with evidence that your Zoom 16-18 Travel Pass would have been valid and point out the similarities to a lost railcard scenario, they might take pity on you and refund some or all of that money.

 

[dragongsd]

Hi, sorry it’s a little of a complicated post and some of the details are muddled. My 16-18 travel pass is active. My zoom travel pass (a seperate pass) is not. I don’t think it’s very relevant considering it would not have been eligible to use on trains anyway.

The issue can be boiled down to: I selected the wrong pass (16-17 saver) instead of the 16-18 travel pass that was active and usable. I had lost the pass at the time but did not pay for a replacement as I thought the zoom pass replaced the functionality, which it didn’t. The zoom pass was not listed on the app which probably confused me more but I didn’t really have time to check because there’s quite a few cards listed, and the train was just pulling up. I have used the 16-18 pass on trains before no problem (when i had the pass) by paying on the train but after being told I wasn’t allowed to do this I tried buying a ticket at station/on app which lead to this incident. The fare i paid is the exact same as i have paid in the past while using my 16-18 travel pass, so although i didn’t have it on me, if i had i would be eligible for the same price. Does not having your card on you make you ineligible for the discount?

Again, sorry if it’s a little confusing. If you still think i should just pay the fine i’ll do so and email them after as some of you have said. Thanks

 

[zwk500]

Does not having your card on you make you ineligible for the discount?

Yes, you are required to have the correct, valid railcard when travelling to prove you are entitled to the discount applied to the ticket.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The fare i paid is the exact same as i have paid in the past while using my 16-18 travel pass, so although i didn’t have it on me, if i had i would be eligible for the same price. Does not having your card on you make you ineligible for the discount?

I've put the important bits in italics. You are expected to be carrying the document that proves you can have a cheap ticket (normally a railcard but in this case a pass). You weren't carrying it so you weren't allowed to use the discount

Again, sorry if it’s a little confusing. If you still think i should just pay the fine i’ll do so and email them after as some of you have said. Thanks

I think you should just pay the fine*.

*For regular readers - yes, I know. It's not a fine. Courts do fines. But let's keep it simple.

 

[Turtle]

I've put the important bits in italics. You are expected to be carrying the document that proves you can have a cheap ticket (normally a railcard but in this case a pass). You weren't carrying it so you weren't allowed to use the discount

I think you should just pay the fine*.

*For regular readers - yes, I know. It's not a fine. Courts do fines. But let's keep it simple.

So once again a TOC has been able to impose a substantial additional payment on a passenger who handed over the correct fare by benefiting from the strict liability law. This may be legal but such a practice does little for the railway's image.

 

[scrapy]

So once again a TOC has been able to impose a substantial additional payment on a passenger who handed over the correct fare by benefiting from the strict liability law. This may be legal but such a practice does little for the railway's image.

The additional payment is not imposed of the passenger, they are given the choice to go to court if they like.

The passenger had not handed over the correct fare for their journey. They did not have a valid pass so should have bought a full priced ticket. (This is a statement of fact based on what the OP told us and there is no evidence that the OP tried to fare evade but made a mistake whereby Northern didn't receive the correct fare).

In my opinion Northern should have offered the passenger a penalty fare or a settlement equivalent to a penalty fare (£20) but that's purely my opinion and based on the facts being what the OP has told us, we haven't seen the inspectors statement or any other evidence Northern may have.

With local authority schemes such as Zoom, Northern will receive a payment from the passenger, in this case 50% of the fare, they will usually then receive a top up from the issuing authority to subsidise some or all of the remaining fare (depending on commercial agreements). When passenger selects a different ticket which is the same fare (say for example buys a child ticket) the amount paid by the passenger is the same but the amount the operator receives for the ticket is different. So In the same way I know that some local authorities do checks to see that transport operators don't abuse the scheme by selling concessions to people that aren't entitled. So if Northern aren't seen by councils to be making a stance against those who don't use these schemes properly then they could lose out on future subsidies etc.

 

[skyhigh]

So once again a TOC has been able to impose a substantial additional payment on a passenger who handed over the correct fare by benefiting from the strict liability law. This may be legal but such a practice does little for the railway's image.

Going from the original post, the sequence of events was:
Passenger bought a ticket with a 16-17 Railcard discount applied
When ticket was inspected, presumably they asked to see the railcard - and what was presented was a card with a clear commencement date printed on it (of 2nd August) that wouldn't even be valid for trains in the first place.

That very much looks to an inspector like a case of trying to buy a fare they weren't entitled to. If the OP had said 'I've forgotten/lost the railcard' rather than show a completely invalid card it possibly would have been treated differently.

 

[Turtle]

Going from the original post, the sequence of events was:
Passenger bought a ticket with a 16-17 Railcard discount applied
When ticket was inspected, presumably they asked to see the railcard - and what was presented was a card with a clear commencement date printed on it (of 2nd August) that wouldn't even be valid for trains in the first place.

That very much looks to an inspector like a case of trying to buy a fare they weren't entitled to. If the OP had said 'I've forgotten/lost the railcard' rather than show a completely invalid card it possibly would have been treated differently.

Agreed. The behaviour of the OP was daft to say the least. But I try to look at these situations from a broader point of view. The Railway is allowed to override the principle of equity in English Common Law even where it has suffered no pecuniary loss.

 

[dragongsd]

The additional payment is not imposed of the passenger, they are given the choice to go to court if they like.

I hope you can understand the reluctance to take any small matter to court, as an 18 year old who has never been in trouble for anything in his life, especially when the letter they send is... threatening, to say the least (atleast to me). From this one experience, my lack of knowledge of the laws, and to be honest, lack of faith in the courts, the power Northern Rail could potentially have over me legally, even considering the relatively small infringement, makes me nervous.

I'm going to accompany a screenshot of the letter I received.




Sorry for the poor crop. I have removed any identifying information. I hope you can empathise with the stress this would cause, being told I face a potentially bigger fine and a criminal record, with less than two weeks to decide, coupled with the fact I get absoloutely no correspondence from them AT ALL regarding this matter. I have sent them several emails and waited nearly a week for a response, and have received none at all. I understand the right to prosecute where you feel necessary, but I have provided a large amount of evidence over email (my travel passes identifying number I found online, a screenshot from the travel SY page to show its active, etc).

I have (reluctantly) paid the fine. From your post I can kind of understand the reasoning behind enforcing this so strictly but the fact I paid a little less than 5x more than someone who evades the fare entirely is beyond stupid to me, even outside of my circumstances. This coupled with the nature of their letter, eluding my attempts at contact, and the short time frame gives me the impression that this is purely for financial gain. Their swift correspondence when in regards to giving penalties but complete silence when attempting to explain the circumstances speaks volumes. I would much rather receive an email "sorry, but to argue this you need to go to court" than the current "make your case by email. If we accept you will hear nothing for two weeks, if we do not, you will also hear nothing, be ready for court". Not only did they make me pay the amount of the full fare, plus 90 pounds, but they also didn't refund me for the half fare that I originally paid online. Maybe they are "legally" entitled to do so, but this is a dick move.

Anyway, does anyone know who I can contact at northern regarding this? The DRPU is not going to respond to me (they haven't yet, other than their demands for money, despite my multiple emails asking to speak to a real person) and if I'm going to fork over 95 pounds for this I'd much rather get some rail coupons to show for it than nothing at all.

edit: misinterpreted your last post, apologies

The passenger had not handed over the correct fare for their journey. They did not have a valid pass so should have bought a full priced ticket. (This is a statement of fact based on what the OP told us and there is no evidence that the OP tried to fare evade but made a mistake whereby Northern didn't receive the correct fare).

In my opinion Northern should have offered the passenger a penalty fare or a settlement equivalent to a penalty fare (£20) but that's purely my opinion and based on the facts being what the OP has told us, we haven't seen the inspectors statement or any other evidence Northern may have.

I came here for advice. Giving inaccurate information would only give me an inaccurate answer. I don't know if you're trying to imply that I have lied about what happened, but I hope you see that I would have little reason to do so.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The Railway is allowed to override the principle of equity in English Common Law even where it has suffered no pecuniary loss.

1) IANAL, but my understanding is that statute law overrides common law.
2) It's worth thinking about why the railway is pursuing the OP. As far as I can tell, the railway haven't said anything about the ticket that was bought being for £x, while the ticket that the OP thought they were entitled to was also £x. Rather, the railway has concentrated on the (acknowledged) absence of a Railcard/pass that would allow the OP to use an £x ticket. And I don't see this as unreasonable: if the rule was that a Railcard/pass only had to be produced after a challenge, it's not hard to see that some people would only buy a Railcard/pass after the challenge, and others would share a pass with friends. (n.b. for the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting that the OP would do this.)

We're giving advice here, so let's be clear what offence is involved on what facts.

 

[dragongsd]

1) IANAL, but my understanding is that statute law overrides common law.
2) It's worth thinking about why the railway is pursuing the OP. As far as I can tell, the railway haven't said anything about the ticket that was bought being for £x, while the ticket that the OP thought they were entitled to was also £x. Rather, the railway has concentrated on the (acknowledged) absence of a Railcard/pass that would allow the OP to use an £x ticket. And I don't see this as unreasonable: if the rule was that a Railcard/pass only had to be produced after a challenge, it's not hard to see that some people would only buy a Railcard/pass after the challenge, and others would share a pass with friends. (n.b. for the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting that the OP would do this.)

We're giving advice here, so let's be clear what offence is involved on what facts.

Part of the evidence I provided was a information regarding the rail pass that was in my name. On the Travel SY site screenshot I sent it also listed a date that the card was active from (2018), a name, and an identifying number that I have no doubt they could have used to verify this information should they have been arsed.

The offense they’re accusing me of is “travelling without paying the full fare and with the intent of avoiding that fare”

Considering the wording (“full” fare) it seems to me they believe me to have paid them less than what I should have. So yes, I think it boils down to wether or not i was eligible for the concession without the card on me. I don’t believe “intent to avoid paying that fare” necessarily applies within the context intended when it was written but the statement is ambiguous enough to encompass a lot of things.

I made a fairly long post that’s yet to be moderator approved, think it’s because of the image of the letter I got. I paid what was demanded. I’m now looking for someone to speak to regarding compensation, train coupon or otherwise regarding this. God knows the DRPU won’t bother to contact me unless it’s about sending them more money.

 

[scrapy]

Part of the evidence I provided was a information regarding the rail pass that was in my name. On the Travel SY site screenshot I sent it also listed a date that the card was active from (2018), a name, and an identifying number that I have no doubt they could have used to verify this information should they have been arsed.

I made a fairly long post that’s yet to be moderator approved, think it’s because of the image of the letter I got. I paid what was demanded. I’m now looking for someone to speak to regarding compensation, train coupon or otherwise regarding this. God knows the DRPU won’t bother to contact me unless it’s about sending them more money.

What do you feel you should be compensated for?

 

[dragongsd]

What do you feel you should be compensated for?

Wait for my longer post to be approved

 

[WesternLancer]

You have various options if you wish to press your case and dedicate time on the process.

- write to Northern Customer Services
- Write to Northern Cheif Executive
- Take it up with the Rail Ombudsman
- Take it up with Transport Focus

details for all of the above on web of course

I am not saying that these options will necessarily produce the outcome you hope for (they may or may not, I suspect not but unless you try you won't know) but I think those are the places to make the case that you have been treated unfairly (possibly in that order listed above). Probably best to read the relevant sections of their websites on complaints processes to ensure you make your complaints in a way that means they are not simply dismissed by virtue to being made in an incorrect manner (eg Ombudsmen etc will not usually consider a case until a complainant have attempted to use the rail companies internal complaints procedures first).

 

[jumble]

Having read your very detailed post, let me check I've got this right.
You've been issued a 16-18 South Yorkshire pass which gives you a 50% discount, the same as the 16-17 saver, BUT your 16-18 pass isn't valid yet?
If the 16-18 pass was valid and you had paid exactly the same fare as you would have done then I would attempt to appeal to their better nature pointing out that you had paid exactly the same fare (unless your journey went outside of the area where the 16-18 pass was valid), however, if the 16-18 pass ISN'T yet valid then you haven't paid exactly the same fare as you were entitled and you have inadvertently avoided your correct fare, in which case it may be advisable to pay the settlement, obviously its your right to go to court and argue your case but in doing so you would need to consider the extra potential costs and possible criminal record.

My understanding was that no fare has been avoided as the OP was still entitled to use their 16-17 pass which they had lost
It does seem unfair that if this were a railcard there would be no issue

 

[swt_passenger]

[…]
It does seem unfair that if this were a railcard there would be no issue

If it had been a railcard that was “lost” he’d still be in the same position. The published conditions for railcards are there to allow for a valid railcard being “forgotten” and then provided to the TOC after the event.

 

[jumble]

You have various options if you wish to press your case and dedicate time on the process.

- write to Northern Customer Services
- Write to Northern Cheif Executive
- Take it up with the Rail Ombudsman
- Take it up with Transport Focus

details for all of the above on web of course

I am not saying that these options will necessarily produce the outcome you hope for (they may or may not, I suspect not but unless you try you won't know) but I think those are the places to make the case that you have been treated unfairly (possibly in that order listed above). Probably best to read the relevant sections of their websites on complaints processes to ensure you make your complaints in a way that means they are not simply dismissed by virtue to being made in an incorrect manner (eg Ombudsmen etc will not usually consider a case until a complainant have attempted to use the rail companies internal complaints procedures first).

 

[scrapy]

If it had been a railcard that was “lost” he’d still be in the same position. The published conditions are there to allow for a valid railcard being “forgotten” and then provided to the TOC after the event.

The zoom card is not a Railcard and the terms of the 16-18 zoom pass are not the same as the terms of a Railcard. The conditions of local area passes are set by the issuing authority and both holders and transport providers have to follow them. The OP could have paid £7 for a replacement pass but chose not to. The pass issuers state 'no pass means full fare'. There website also explains what to do if you lose a pass. There is no allowance for refunds if forgotten and this is probably recognised in the subsidy they pay Northern with no payment to Northern towards administor refunds when passes are forgotten or lost. On the day the OP had bought a discounted ticket with no evidence they were entitled to the discount.

People may think that it is unfair to treat it different to a Railcard holder who has forgotten their Railcard once, however the cost of administration for that one refund a year will be accounted for in the money the operator receives for the sale of railcards.

There are plenty of things that one may consider unfair when terms and conditions of one discount being different to others, but it doesn't mean just because one product has more favourable terms to other similar products that the more favourable terms should be applied across the board. I don't agree that working over 60s pay the same for their Railcard as young people in full time education but get more favourable terms, but it is what it is.

The OP may or may not get a goodwill gesture from Northern but are in no way entitled to it and I would advice describing what you are asking for as a goodwill gesture following a mistake on their part rather than compensation may be more likely to get a result.

 

[swt_passenger]

The zoom card is not a Railcard and the terms of the 16-17 zoom pass are not the same as the terms of a Railcard. The conditions of local area passes are set by the issuing authority and both holders and transport providers have to follow them. The OP could have paid £7 for a replacement pass but chose not to. The pass issuers state 'no pass means full fare'...

Yes, but my reply was really only intended to be about the second part of post #21, where @jumble suggests that IF it was a railcard there’d be no issue…

 

[WesternLancer]

The zoom card is not a Railcard and the terms of the 16-18 zoom pass are not the same as the terms of a Railcard. The conditions of local area passes are set by the issuing authority and both holders and transport providers have to follow them. The OP could have paid £7 for a replacement pass but chose not to. The pass issuers state 'no pass means full fare'. There website also explains what to do if you lose a pass. There is no allowance for refunds if forgotten and this is probably recognised in the subsidy they pay Northern with no payment to Northern towards administor refunds when passes are forgotten or lost. On the day the OP had bought a discounted ticket with no evidence they were entitled to the discount.

People may think that it is unfair to treat it different to a Railcard holder who has forgotten their Railcard once, however the cost of administration for that one refund a year will be accounted for in the money the operator receives for the sale of railcards.

There are plenty of things that one may consider unfair when terms and conditions of one discount being different to others, but it doesn't mean just because one product has more favourable terms to other similar products that the more favourable terms should be applied across the board. I don't agree that working over 60s pay the same for their Railcard as young people in full time education but get more favourable terms, but it is what it is.

The OP may or may not get a goodwill gesture from Northern but are in no way entitled to it and I would advice describing what you are asking for as a goodwill gesture following a mistake on their part rather than compensation may be more likely to get a result.

I agree with this and suggest if the OP wishes to pursue it with any chance of success at all, they follow the advice in the last para here from Scrapy (which I have placed in Bold)

 

[30907]

I came here for advice. Giving inaccurate information would only give me an inaccurate answer. I don't know if you're trying to imply that I have lied about what happened, but I hope you see that I would have little reason to do so.

Thank you for confirming that you've told us all the relevant information - unfortunately, long experience on this forum is that not everybody does. Apologies if the challenge was inappropriate.

 

[philthetube]

Part of the evidence I provided was a information regarding the rail pass that was in my name. On the Travel SY site screenshot I sent it also listed a date that the card was active from (2018), a name, and an identifying number that I have no doubt they could have used to verify this information should they have been arsed.

The offense they’re accusing me of is “travelling without paying the full fare and with the intent of avoiding that fare”

Considering the wording (“full” fare) it seems to me they believe me to have paid them less than what I should have. So yes, I think it boils down to wether or not i was eligible for the concession without the card on me. I don’t believe “intent to avoid paying that fare” necessarily applies within the context intended when it was written but the statement is ambiguous enough to encompass a lot of things.

I made a fairly long post that’s yet to be moderator approved, think it’s because of the image of the letter I got. I paid what was demanded. I’m now looking for someone to speak to regarding compensation, train coupon or otherwise regarding this. God knows the DRPU won’t bother to contact me unless it’s about sending them more money.

it seems clear to me that there was n o intent, would it be to others if this had been properly reviewed

 

[30907]

it seems clear to me that there was n o intent, would it be to others if this had been properly reviewed

Claiming a discount to which you cannot prove entitlement is an "intent" matter. As the OP has lost their pass, they unfortunately put themselves in that position.
If they could get something in writing from SY confirming that they had held the 16-18 pass, that might help towards a goodwill gesture following a review.