Short fare issue, where the fares are the same price

[Golfer1234]

Hi,

Travelling from Davenport to Manc Pic. Usually at night I get off at Stockport

Upon arriving at Davenport, the queue for tickets was massive and the train had just arrived, I got permission from the person checking tickets to jump on and get a ticket on the train/at manc.

On the train I tried to get a ticket, but when the ticket office finally came, she went back to open the doors.

At Pic I purchased a return to stockport. (stupid ik.), in the past when they've asked where I've come from and going to, I get a train to stockport at night and because the price of a return to manc from davenport and from stockport is exactly the same (£5.90), I asked for a return to stockport. Obviously stupid on my part, but I was in a rush to get to work and didn't want to waste time explaining why I wasn't going back to davenport at night

Apparently I'll be getting a letter whereby I need to explain my actions.

Given the fact that both tickets cost the same, I tried to purchase a ticket at Davenport and on the train, and I have never had any issues buying tickets in the past. What could be the outcome of this?

thanks in advance for any advice, feel free to call me stupid, I know it !

 

[coxxy]

You have short fared.. Whether there was no monetary difference or not you still didn't have a valid ticket for the journey you made and then lied for whatever reason.

 

[northwichcat]

The RPI would probably have known you can't have started your journey at Stockport, as you would have had to go past a RPI to get between the entrance to Stockport station and platforms 3/4.

However, they wouldn't have known if you actually started your journey at Davenport or Buxton or even London Euston. All they know is it didn't sound like you started your journey at Stockport.

 

[Failed Unit]

I guess if anyone had started at Euston and travelled on a Euston - Stockport ticket, would the RPI be happy with the production of this to prove they didn't jump the barrier. (Or would they say you should have purchased your ticket a Stockport.) sorry for tangent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You have short fared.. Whether there was no monetary difference or not you still didn't have a valid ticket for the journey you made and then lied for whatever reason.

This is one of those things that have changed hugely in terms of being tolerated in the last few years. The railway is very reluctant to issue zero-fare overdistance excesses. I have, in the past, asked for one for a similar journey but the opposite way round (i.e. having a ticket to e.g. Stockport and travelling to e.g. Davenport), and simply been told to explain myself and point out it was the same fare if questioned.

I would expect this one will end up as one of Northern's favoured £80 faux Penalty Fares, which if it does I'd just pay and that will be the end of it. But that way round don't do it again as it does seem to show intent, though not to avoid any fare if it's the same!

 

[Golfer1234]

thanks for the responses so far, is it likely I'll be getting a warning letter?

 

[DaleCooper]

Hi,

Travelling from Davenport to Manc Pic. Usually at night I get off at Stockport

Upon arriving at Davenport, the queue for tickets was massive and the train had just arrived, I got permission from the person checking tickets to jump on and get a ticket on the train/at manc.

On the train I tried to get a ticket, but when the ticket office finally came, she went back to open the doors.

At Pic I purchased a return to stockport. (stupid ik.), in the past when they've asked where I've come from and going to, I get a train to stockport at night and because the price of a return to manc from davenport and from stockport is exactly the same (£5.90), I asked for a return to stockport. Obviously stupid on my part, but I was in a rush to get to work and didn't want to waste time explaining why I wasn't going back to davenport at night

Apparently I'll be getting a letter whereby I need to explain my actions.

Given the fact that both tickets cost the same, I tried to purchase a ticket at Davenport and on the train, and I have never had any issues buying tickets in the past. What could be the outcome of this?

thanks in advance for any advice, feel free to call me stupid, I know it !

I hope your explanation makes more sense than this, I can't see any rationale for your actions in the above post. The part about not wanting to explain why you weren't returning to Davenport makes no sense to me or am I just being thick?

 

[Golfer1234]

I hope your explanation makes more sense than this, I can't see any rationale for your actions in the above post. The part about not wanting to explain why you weren't returning to Davenport makes no sense to me or am I just being thick?

Last time I got charged 2 singles, equating to more than £5.90 because the ticket person got confused, hence I just asked for a return to stockport, because I didn't have time to waste explaining why I go back to stockport and not davenport.

The cost of a return to davenport and stockport is the same, hence I thought there wouldn't be an issue, clearly an oversight from me, but that's why I did it

 

[Haywain]

This is one of those things that have changed hugely in terms of being tolerated in the last few years. The railway is very reluctant to issue zero-fare overdistance excesses. I have, in the past, asked for one for a similar journey but the opposite way round (i.e. having a ticket to e.g. Stockport and travelling to e.g. Davenport), and simply been told to explain myself and point out it was the same fare if questioned.

Zero fare excesses (or any other sort of excess) have nothing to do with this case. If the OP had arrived at Manchester Piccadilly and bought a ticket from Davenport there would have been no issue, and he would have been able to leave the station at Stockport on the return journey under break of journey rules. The facts of the matter are that the OP travelled from Davenport and then purchased a ticket which did not cover the whole of the journey that had already been made.

 

[Golfer1234]

Zero fare excesses (or any other sort of excess) have nothing to do with this case. If the OP had arrived at Manchester Piccadilly and bought a ticket from Davenport there would have been no issue, and he would have been able to leave the station at Stockport on the return journey under break of journey rules. The facts of the matter are that the OP travelled from Davenport and then purchased a ticket which did not cover the whole of the journey that had already been made.

yep, I just want to try and understand what the letter will be about

 

[Failed Unit]

I hope your explanation makes more sense than this, I can't see any rationale for your actions in the above post. The part about not wanting to explain why you weren't returning to Davenport makes no sense to me or am I just being thick?

I agree, it makes no sense. I have done it the other way around when I have asked for a ticket from the station before I got on. (Because I was travelling back to it) on tickets where a break in journey is ok. Not sure how an RPI would take that if a blockage had occurred at the station in question.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Zero fare excesses (or any other sort of excess) have nothing to do with this case. If the OP had arrived at Manchester Piccadilly and bought a ticket from Davenport there would have been no issue, and he would have been able to leave the station at Stockport on the return journey under break of journey rules. The facts of the matter are that the OP travelled from Davenport and then purchased a ticket which did not cover the whole of the journey that had already been made.

Correct. The fact that the OP got permission to board at Davenport without having first paid at the ticket office was an authority to pay the fare from Davenport, the place where he started his journey, at the first opportunity.

It was not an authority to offer a fare for a shorter journey than that actually made. Technically at least, the TOC can show that there is a fare available from Davenport to Stockport (£1.60) which could be said to have gone unpaid.

In readiness, before you receive any letter, I suggest you ask the person at Davenport to give you a signed confirmation that s/he authorised you to pay on train on that occasion.

 

[Golfer1234]

Correct. The fact that the OP got permission to board at Davenport without having first paid at the ticket office was an authority to pay the fare from Davenport, the place where he started his journey, at the first opportunity.

It was not an authority to offer a fare for a shorter journey than that actually made. Technically at least, the TOC can show that there is a fare available from Davenport to Stockport (£1.60) which could be said to have gone unpaid.

In readiness, before you receive any letter, I suggest you ask the person at Davenport to give you a signed confirmation that s/he authorised you to pay on train on that occasion.

thanks, will the letter be a formal warning or a court summons. would it be wise to ring them?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was not an authority to offer a fare for a shorter journey than that actually made. Technically at least, the TOC can show that there is a fare available from Davenport to Stockport (£1.60) which could be said to have gone unpaid.

I think that is pushing it a little, as the correct fare should have been paid for the through journey which was...umm...the fare offered to be paid. Would be interested to know if the OP knew this, or short-fared in the hope of saving money.

Indeed, back in the days of Edmondson cards, a ticket would often contain multiple origins/destinations based on common fares. I have an old Merseyrail one somewhere, on which was written that it was a "single from Liverpool Central to any station bounded by Rice Lane, Walton or Bank Hall", or some such wording.

That said, the OP was a fool for not stating his intended travel plans ("I've come from Davenport, but going to back to Stockport later"), which would have resulted in the correct ticket.

 

[Golfer1234]

I think that is pushing it a little, as the correct fare should have been paid for the through journey which was...umm...the fare offered to be paid. Would be interested to know if the OP knew this, or short-fared in the hope of saving money.

Indeed, back in the days of Edmondson cards, a ticket would often contain multiple origins/destinations based on common fares. I have an old Merseyrail one somewhere, on which was written that it was a "single from Liverpool Central to any station bounded by Rice Lane, Walton or Bank Hall", or some such wording.

That said, the OP was a fool for not stating his intended travel plans ("I've come from Davenport, but going to back to Stockport later"), which would have resulted in the correct ticket.

Agreed, a stupid oversight. I asked for a return to stockport without thinking, due to getting off at night, and realised this, but knew the price was the same (I've purchased a return to stockport recently) , so I didn't bother asking her to change it. Hence, I didn't intend to save money by buying this ticket, I was just an idiot in not asking for it to be changed

 

[northwichcat]

The part about not wanting to explain why you weren't returning to Davenport makes no sense to me or am I just being thick?

Only logical possibility I can think of is perhaps the passenger didn't realise it was the same price for a Davenport-Manchester return as a Stockport-Manchester return until after the incident.

The OP claims to have purchased an Anytime Return ticket and I can't see any instances where you can get around peak restrictions by claiming you started at Stockport instead of Davenport.

 

[Golfer1234]

I knew the fare from davenport-pic/stockport-pic return cost the same, which is why I didn't ask the lady issuing the ticket to change it, it would have wasted even more time.

I should have paid more attention to what I was saying than worrying about getting to work, and have paid the price.

I haven't intentionally tried to avoid any costs or fares, and believed because the cost was the same there wouldn't be an issue, which was wrong.

Do you think NR will take this into consideration?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The OP claims to have purchased an Anytime Return ticket and I can't see any instances where you can get around peak restrictions by claiming you started at Stockport instead of Davenport.

Possibly having read stories in the media about people being fined when ending short on Advances and assumed it related to normal tickets?

 

[DaleCooper]

I think the OP is waiting for the moderator to clear their posts so expect answers soon.

 

[bb21]

I think the OP is waiting for the moderator to clear their posts so expect answers soon.

Yes, you're right.

Their posts should appear normally from now on.

 

[Golfer1234]

Yes, you're right.

Their posts should appear normally from now on.

thanks bb21, apologies if my responses seem illogical to other peoples replies, I tried to respond at the time but they didn't show, so some peoples q's may be answered in earlier posts.. sorry lol

 

[Huntscross]

Hi I had a similar issue with accidentally short faring a same price ticket, got an £80 fine letter but rang them and they dropped it.
Basically I normally get the 8.02 train from lime street, but was running late so jumped a taxi to edge hill. Without thinking I got a edge hill return to Thatto Heath which is the same price as a lime street to Thatto Heath return. I asked the guy in the ticket booth but he couldn't do an excess and told me to ask the guard which I did, but he said wasn't worth doing. So I get to the barrier and get pulled up like the trusting idiot I am. Thankfully the nice lady at Northern cancelled it.

 

[cjmillsnun]

thanks for the responses so far, is it likely I'll be getting a warning letter?

No. You're going to get a letter asking you to put your side of the story over.

When you do this, be completely honest about everything. Be concise, accurate and remorseful.

It is then in the hands of Northern's prosecution department as to how they would like to proceed.

They have 5 options.

1. Take no further action. Don't expect this one. If they do decide this, count yourself exceedingly lucky.

2. Ask you to pay for the journey between Davenport - Stockport. I believe Fare Cop has stated this is £1.60. On a good day, you might get this offer.

3. Offer a settlement of the full fare for your journey plus an administration fee (normally £80 with Northern). If you've never been in trouble with the railway before this is the most likely outcome.

4. Decide to prosecute under the Railway Byelaws. Not the end of the world, but it is a strict liability offence so it would be an open and shut case. The good news is it is non recordable, so there would be a fine plus costs but no criminal record.

5. Decide to prosecute under RoRA section 5. This is recordable and will show up on a DBS check even after the conviction is spent.

 

[najaB]

5. Decide to prosecute under RoRA section 5. This is recordable and will show up on a DBS check even after the conviction is spent.

I doubt they will be able to make a RoRA § 5 prosecution stick as there is no clear intent to avoid paying the fare due - the railway was due £5.90 and received £5.90.

 

[Merseysider]

I doubt they will be able to make a RoRA § 5 prosecution stick as there is no clear intent to avoid paying the fare due - the railway was due £5.90 and received £5.90.

I would tentatively agree with this point.

The input of DaveNewcastle into this affair would be most welcome.

I would echo the advice of Fare-Cop and suggest that when you are next at Davenport station, you speak to the member of staff (not if there's a massive queue of course) as it would be very easy to prosecute you for the Byelaw offence of boarding without a ticket if you have no proof you were given permission to buy on board. It would have been wise to approach the conductor immediately upon boarding, rather than waiting for them to reach you.

 

[northwichcat]

I would echo the advice of Fare-Cop and suggest that when you are next at Davenport station, you speak to the member of staff (not if there's a massive queue of course) as it would be very easy to prosecute you for the Byelaw offence of boarding without a ticket if you have no proof you were given permission to buy on board. It would have been wise to approach the conductor immediately upon boarding, rather than waiting for them to reach you.

I would say that's actually a normal Northern ticket office staff approach for where there's a queue so long the one person in the ticket office can't possibly sell everyone a ticket in a reasonable amount of time.

Northern have generally fitted TVMs at stations where staff were struggling opposed to employing more people but their Parkeon TVMs aren't that reliable.

 

[Golfer1234]

Thanks everyone for your input, have been extremely helpful, much appreciated

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I doubt they will be able to make a RoRA § 5 prosecution stick as there is no clear intent to avoid paying the fare due - the railway was due £5.90 and received £5.90.

I would tentatively agree with this point.

The input of DaveNewcastle into this affair would be most welcome.

I would echo the advice of Fare-Cop and suggest that when you are next at Davenport station, you speak to the member of staff . . . . .

I agree with Fare-Cop that the confirmation of the person on duty who gave the authorisation will be of great assistance. But I also realise that it may be hard to achieve that.

On the technical question of "intent" where there is no financial loss, then I have to say that the outcome in, either, correspondence with the Company's Revenue Protection and Prosecutions Department, or in a Magistrates Court, is unlikely to be predictable.
There are cases where the "intent" was taken as absolute evidence of the Offence (even when the passenger actually had a valid ticket in their possession - Browning v Floyd) and there are also cases where the Court has refused to hear any evidence of the Criminal Offence, on the grounds that there is only a contractural breach, which is dismissed as a civil matter, and one with no losses at that. (I have no record if any of these cases were subsequently pursued as civil claims having been rejected as Criminal Offences since privatisation. Perhaps Fare-Cop might know of any?).

Clearly, a good negotiator will be able to reach a pragmatic solution with any Prosecutor, who will be well aware of the hazards in proceeding with a claim for an offence with criminal intent and zero loss which is contested. [But it's not completely untested territory - there is an interesting legal side line of "victimless-crimes", such as the 'pick-pocket' who was caught red-handed picking an empty pocket). This is the crux of my answer - it's not in anyone's interest to waste time and money persuing a zero cost irregularity as a first-time and one-off incident.

This is where Railway Byelaw 18 really comes into its own - being unable to produce the appropriate ticket on demand catches many of these incidents which are grey areas in terms of the statute.

But as a final remark, we should never assume that the amount paid will always discharge the duty to pay exactly that amount. As examples, a fare paid for travel between two stations, but in the wrong direction, will not be accepted. A fare paid for travel between two stations but only on another train will not be accepted. (and as with other examples often discussed on here).

 

[paddington]

I may be missing something here, but why couldn't the OP have bought a return from Davenport and then just get off at Stockport in the evening?

 

[najaB]

I may be missing something here, but why couldn't the OP have bought a return from Davenport and then just get off at Stockport in the evening?

The OP has said this:

Last time I got charged 2 singles, equating to more than £5.90 because the ticket person got confused, hence I just asked for a return to stockport.