I would say that it does, as it is designed such that you cannot pay the correct fare until you've finished your journey. In fact, the OP would have been overcharged as they would have paid the maximum fare upon entry, but the TOC has not allowed them to tap out by not providing the facilities to do so.
Now that's rich - the TOC is at fault for not providing facilities to pay an Oyster fare at a station not covered by Oyster.
But the OP isn't using Oyster, they're using contactless. The TOC invited them to begin their journey by using contactless, but is not allowing them to finish their journey by contactless. Look at it from the customer's point of view - it would be like going into a restaurant and being told you can pay by contactless. So you order a baked potato. You get the bill and come to pay at the end using contactless, but are told you can only use contactless if you'd had a hamburger. Then being summonsed to court for it, despite having paid a deposit at the beginning larger than what your bill came to at the end. That's how this comes across to the uninitiated.
But that's not the OP's address. The law doesn't require the passenger to give a name and address but his name and address. Would you say that a PO box address would be acceptable?
Reading a bit more into the situation than the OP has written. My interpretation was that the OP declined to accept a PF, which is a rather different situation.
I didn't miss your point. You missed mine. The customer was paying by contactless. You cannot seriously expect them to know they are starting an Oyster journey when they're not using an Oystercard? I know the journey is not covered by Oyster, but the OP did not know the journey is not covered by contactless, and they cannot be expected to know it is not covered by contactless. The whole situation has turned into a mess, and trips up those without an in-depth knowledge of how the railway works.
Tapping in at an Oyster reader being a clue? I've not seen a Contactless reader and I don't think the OP (who I sympathise with) is trying to claim there is a difference.
But if you tap your NatWest card on a Barclays terminal in a shop, you're still using your NatWest account, even thought he money is travelling via Barclays. I really do not think that passengers should be expected to be technical experts in payment systems just to try and pay a walk-up fare to travel on a train.
This is one thing that really annoys me about 'modern society' - what ever happened to people informing themselves? These days people expect to be spoon fed and if they get caught out through ignorance of the rules the response isn't "Oh, silly me. I should have checked." it's "Wahh, it's not my fault. Nobody told me." (This comment is directed to @Surreytraveller rather than the OP).
I don't disagree with you, and it is easy for those that work in, or are familiar with, the industry. However, things are a lot more complicated these days, and how far should someone go to informing themselves? Thirty years ago, the only way to buy a ticket was from a ticket office. Now, you not only have the ticket office, you have self-service machines. You have various internet sites, some run by train companies, others not. You might be able to pay on the train. You have Oystercards and contactless. All these different methods of payment work differently, have their own conditions and foibles. If you make an ad-hoc journey, can someone be expected to start researching how they're going to pay for it when it is obvious that contactless will let you into the system, but not obvious it won't let you out the system at the other end until you get there?
Would it confuse the staff too much if you gave your residence, and also an address for correspondence? Could the TOC be relied upon to contact you at the location you have asked to be contacted at, and only given your home address to meet the legal requirements? If the TOC then did not follow your request to be corresponded with at your work address, and you did not receive any communication as a result, that could potentially nullify any action they took against you (or at least put the situation back to square one)
So if I tap into the gate at Kings Cross and catch the noon train would you expect to be able to tap out upon arrival in Inverness ?
I think the sentiment is clear. I don't think a reasonable person would think that is possible. But Epsom is within the M25 (yes, I know this isn't determinitive, but it at least some sort of clue!), and two other stations near Epsom (Epsom Downs and Tattenham Corner), each of which are further from central London, accept Oyster/contactless. So the thought that travel to Epsom is permissible on Oyster/contactless is a quite understandable one. Not to mention the fact that, as of a few month's time, it will become permissible!
