Single Justice Procedure Notice for invalid ticket Stevenage to Farringdon

[gr045]

Hello,

I am looking for advice as I have been issued a Single Justice Procedure Notice for an incident in November 2024.

I travelled from Stevenage to Farringdon on a Thameslink train on a weekday morning. I used the return portion of an open return ticket that was for Stevenage to London Bridge. I mistakenly thought that I would not be able to use this ticket to exit at Farringdon (I’ve been told off before for using a ticket from Stevenage to ‘London Terminals’ which is not valid for exit at Farringdon), so I bought a ticket online that covered the portion of my journey from Finsbury Park to Farringdon. I presented this to the ticket officer at Farringdon who said that my tickets were not valid. I’m still not quite sure why not, I think that perhaps the ticket from Stevenage to London Bridge ticket was not valid at peak times? The SJPN does not give explicit detail over which part of my journey or ticket was not valid.

In any case, if I am guilty of a mistake then I am willing to pay any associated fines. I just want to avoid this going on any police record.

I have been issued one fine before for not presenting a valid ticket between Knebworth and Stevenage (I did have a ticket but I believe it was off-peak not peak, it was a long time ago so not sure).

The train company gave me the opportunity to give my side of the story but I missed the deadline for returning the letter, hence being issued a SJPN.

I hold a valid 26-30 railcard which I used for these journeys.

How do you think it would be best to proceed? I have attached the documentation I’ve received that gives full details of the SJPN.


Thanks for your help.

 

[AlterEgo]

Some quick questions:

Was your open return being used well into its validity? Perhaps, several days or weeks into it. It’s not clear from the compressed documents as much of the text is unreadable.

Were you accused of reusing this paper open return ticket?

If the train company looks at your online purchases, will they find other FPK-ZFD tickets? If so, will there be more of these than the number if open returns you buy?

Do you buy open returns in the opposite direction too?

Could we see the handwritten explanation as a separate document? It’s illegible as it’s been compressed too much.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Welcome to the forum!

It may be down to my eyesight or the quality of the monitor I am using, but I can't quite make out the detail of the return ticket shown on page 11 of your submission. Please could you take as high a quality picture of it as possible so that we can see just what tickets you held?

(I now see that @AlterEgo has asked a similar question about another page: please believe that we really are trying to help!)

 

[WesternLancer]

Hello,

I am looking for advice as I have been issued a Single Justice Procedure Notice for an incident in November 2024.

I travelled from Stevenage to Farringdon on a Thameslink train on a weekday morning. I used the return portion of an open return ticket that was for Stevenage to London Bridge. I mistakenly thought that I would not be able to use this ticket to exit at Farringdon (I’ve been told off before for using a ticket from Stevenage to ‘London Terminals’ which is not valid for exit at Farringdon), so I bought a ticket online that covered the portion of my journey from Finsbury Park to Farringdon. I presented this to the ticket officer at Farringdon who said that my tickets were not valid. I’m still not quite sure why not, I think that perhaps the ticket from Stevenage to London Bridge ticket was not valid at peak times? The SJPN does not give explicit detail over which part of my journey or ticket was not valid.

In any case, if I am guilty of a mistake then I am willing to pay any associated fines. I just want to avoid this going on any police record.

I have been issued one fine before for not presenting a valid ticket between Knebworth and Stevenage (I did have a ticket but I believe it was off-peak not peak, it was a long time ago so not sure).

The train company gave me the opportunity to give my side of the story but I missed the deadline for returning the letter, hence being issued a SJPN.

I hold a valid 26-30 railcard which I used for these journeys.

How do you think it would be best to proceed? I have attached the documentation I’ve received that gives full details of the SJPN.


Thanks for your help.

Hi -

some questions -

1) do you have these tickets used on this date still and if so can you upload copies of them

2) do you recall or know what train you travelled on?

3) do you recall or know if that train stopped at Finsbury Park

4) when you were stopped did you show the tickets for Stevenage to London bridge (return portion I guess)?

The best way to proceed is to try to either

a) persuade them you had a valid ticket (people here will be able to help clarify if you did - hence some of my question above), in which case ask them to withdraw the case
b) and / or plead not guilty (as you had a valid ticket) but don't do this yet until (a) above is clarified
c) if you did not have a valid ticket urgently try to persuade them to drop the case and offer you an out of court settlement if your ticket was not valid - so as to avoid the inevitable guilty verdict from the court and the associated fine and criminal record

It may be that you can buy more time by pleading not guilty to the SJPN but don't do anything until you get the advice form here over the next 24 - 48 hours - however, do not miss the court deadline for return of court papers, but hold off sending them back for as long as possible

when is that deadline - is it 21 days from the 10th of March? That's the time frame you have to try and sort this out and avoid court which if so could still be achievable

edit - I see others are asking you similar questions so as to ensure you get the best advice possible

 

[gr045]

Some quick questions:

Was your open return being used well into its validity? Perhaps, several days or weeks into it. It’s not clear from the compressed documents as much of the text is unreadable.

Were you accused of reusing this paper open return ticket?

If the train company looks at your online purchases, will they find other FPK-ZFD tickets? If so, will there be more of these than the number if open returns you buy?

Do you buy open returns in the opposite direction too?

Could we see the handwritten explanation as a separate document? It’s illegible as it’s been compressed too much.

Thanks for your quick response and apologies for poor quality, didn't realise that it had compressed so much important detail!

The letter written gives the same detail as I have written in the post, unfortunately this is the letter that I did not send in time.

I have taken a picture of the evidence page they sent in the SJPN, it looks like the return ticket I used was a number of weeks after the initial purchase of the ticket. I don't believe I was being accused of reusing the ticket. I have not made any other purchases for FPK-ZFD, this was a one off quick fix that obviously was not right! I do buy open returns often from various stations as I travel between home/work/family homes and go to work and university, so don't have a regular train routine.

 

[AlterEgo]

It’ll be really key here to see the OP’s written explanation, as the company has decided to prosecute off the back of it. I think they suspect habitual reuse of the return with a short e-ticket used to activate the gates to retain the return coupon for future abuse. This doesn’t entirely tally with the charge laid, but we need to figure out what the company suspect first and what the facts are to advise on how to proceed.

 

[island]

This is completely incompetent by GTR.

They say the passenger did not present a valid ticket, yet they have a photo of a valid ticket on the witness statement.

They allege an offence that does not exist, and is a duplicitous hodgepodge of two offences.

If they are trying to allege fraudulent reuse of an open return ticket, they have failed abysmally. Everything they want the court to rely on has to be in the pack. They can't add anything else later.

No magistrate should convict on the basis of that evidence. If presented in court it should result in a submission of no case to answer.

 

[gr045]

Hi -

some questions -

1) do you have these tickets used on this date still and if so can you upload copies of them

2) do you recall or know what train you travelled on?

3) do you recall or know if that train stopped at Finsbury Park

4) when you were stopped did you show the tickets for Stevenage to London bridge (return portion I guess)?

The best way to proceed is to try to either

a) persuade them you had a valid ticket (people here will be able to help clarify if you did - hence some of my question above), in which case ask them to withdraw the case
b) and / or plead not guilty (as you had a valid ticket) but don't do this yet until (a) above is clarified
c) if you did not have a valid ticket urgently try to persuade them to drop the case and offer you an out of court settlement if your ticket was not valid - so as to avoid the inevitable guilty verdict from the court and the associated fine and criminal record

It may be that you can buy more time by pleading not guilty to the SJPN but don't do anything until you get the advice form here over the next 24 - 48 hours - however, do not miss the court deadline for return of court papers, but hold off sending them back for as long as possible

when is that deadline - is it 21 days from the 10th of March? That's the time frame you have to try and sort this out and avoid court which if so could still be achievable

edit - I see others are asking you similar questions so as to ensure you get the best advice possible

Thanks for your help. I have replied with a bit more detail to @AlterEgo, but to answer your questions:

I no longer have the ticket, but it was an open return purchased on 17th October, with the return therefore valid until 16th November.

I have figured out that the train I took was either the 08:17 arriving in Farringdon at 08:49 or the 08:31 arriving in Farringdon at 09:04. I would have passed through Finsbury Park then Kings Cross/St Pancras.

When stopped I presented both tickets, the paper open return and the e-ticket from Finsbury Park to Farringdon.

Yes, the letter was dated 10th March so I have a couple of weeks to sort this out.

Welcome to the forum!

It may be down to my eyesight or the quality of the monitor I am using, but I can't quite make out the detail of the return ticket shown on page 11 of your submission. Please could you take as high a quality picture of it as possible so that we can see just what tickets you held?

(I now see that @AlterEgo has asked a similar question about another page: please believe that we really are trying to help!)

Thanks very much, apologies for the poor quality document. I have uploaded some additional photos and responded to @AlterEgo and @WesternLancer with some more info!

 

[30907]

The original ticket, issued from/to London Bridge via City TL, is an Off Peak Return not an Anytime. It is not valid for travel before 0930, and the OP bought their second ticket at 0842.

I think we have been distracted by the second ticket, and its potential use for fraudulent travel.

That ticket means that they paid more than the cost of two Anytime Day Singles, but unfortunately that doesn't make the original ticket valid.

However, AIUI the correct procedure would be to excess the fare - but what to, as the outward has been used? The Anytime Day Single?

Does the OP have a defence here?

 

[John Palmer]

If the summons in this case is bad for duplicity (on the basis that it conflates elements of multiple offences within a single charge) then the same is likely to be true for most, if not all, of GTR's prosecutions in recent years alleging a Byelaw 18(1) offence. It is apparent from a number of copy GTR summonses uploaded to this board that the same formulation of charge has been adopted, the only variations being the date of the alleged offence and the place at which the inspection occurred.

Leaving aside the duplicity issue with the summons, it fails to identify where the alleged offence occurred. It is my understanding that it is the act of entering a train without a ticket entitling travel that constitutes the Byelaw 18(1) offence, in which case, since the OP boarded her train at Stevenage rather than Finsbury Park, the Finsbury Park-Farringdon ticket is irrelevant notwithstanding the emphasis placed upon it by GTR's evidence.

Following up @30907's point, therefore, from time of boarding at Stevenage up to the interview with the RPI the OP was in possession of the return portion of the off-peak London Bridge to Stevenage ticket produced to the RPI. The ticket seems to have been invalid for the service on which she was travelling due to the time restriction, but this was an invalidity capable of being corrected by charge of the appropriate excess under NRCoT Condition 9.5. This leads to the unresolved question of whether Condition 9.5 is capable of constituting permission to travel without a valid ticket, and thus afford a defendant a Byelaw 18(3)(iii) defence to a charge under Byelaw 18(1).

Before any such potential defence is raised the OP needs to respond to the SJPN. I suggest she do so by highlighting the 'Plead not guilty' option on the sheet headed 'Your plea options' before returning this sheet to the court. She might also write to the prosecutor indicating an intention to apply to the court for the summons to be dismissed on the grounds that it is bad for duplicity (the conflation of multiple offences in a single charge point mentioned above) and omits an essential particular of the offence alleged, namely the place at which it is said to have been committed.

When writing to the prosecutor the OP might in addition take the initiative by pointing out:

• that, regardless of the relevance or otherwise of the Finsbury Park-Farringdon ticket, she was throughout her journey in possession of the London Bridge to Stevenage return ticket which she produced to the RPI;
• that if this ticket was invalid for being time restricted she would expect to be charged the appropriate excess under NRCoT Condition 9.5 rather than being prosecuted; and
• that she is content to pay such excess in return for GTR's agreement to withdraw the charge.

 

[Hadders]

Just to try and clarify what I think has happened:

• @gr045 travelled from Stevenage to Farringdon
• The tickets used were:
  • Return Portion of an Off Peak Return from London Bridge to Stevenage
  • Anytime Day Single from Finsbury Park to Farringdon
  • @gr045 was stopped and questioned at Farringdon at 09:04

The Off Peak ticket was not valid for travel at this time. How did @gr045 get through the barriers at Stevenage? (I'm going to assume they used the lifts...)

GTR wrote to @gr045 and they replied. I can't read the reply but GTR have decided to prosecute, which is unusual for GTR as ling as the person co-operates with their investigation.

Ordinarily, using an off peak ticket at an invalid time should result in an excess fare - there's no Anytime Return between London Bridge and Stevenage (only an Anytime Day Rteurn) so it's not clear to me what the excess should cost - I assume they excess to the cost of two Anytime Day Singles?

It seems that GTR believe the ticket has been used multiple times but they have not offered any evidence to this effect. @gr045 has not helped the situation by purchasing a short distance ticket to exit at Farringdon. Interestingly, GTR are claiming the fare avoided is £4.30 but this is the cost of the ticket from Finsbury Park to Farringdon.

I cannot read the letter @gr045 wrote in reply to GTR and I could do with understanding what they said to be able to advise of next steps. Clearly GTR have made a mess of the case but I'm not sure what we should be advising them to do next. Normally, my view is they should be saying they held a ticket that was valid but for the time restriction so they should only be liable to pay an excess fare but the purchase of the additional ticket muddies things a little.

 

[John Palmer]

A couple of further observations:

The train company gave me the opportunity to give my side of the story but I missed the deadline for returning the letter, hence being issued a SJPN.

The prosecutor wrote to the OP on 27 January 2025, requesting a response within 14 days. The OP's response appears to be dated 30.01.2025. That suggests that the deadline was not missed. Did the OP date the response but not return it promptly?

It is not clear that the RPI questioned the OP at Farringdon at 09:04. The “electronically issued GTR Ltd Byelaw Report” is stated to have been issued at 09:07. The 08:59 time displayed on the OP's device in the photograph taken by the RPI of the Finsbury Park-Farringdon ticket suggests that the interview started at least 8 minutes earlier. Since that ticket was actually purchased at 08:42, the suggestion that it was purchased “in the lst (sic) 10 minutes” cannot be true if the time displayed on the device was accurate.

Is there in fact a restriction applicable to the return portion of a London Bridge-Stevenage ticket that prohibits termination of its holder's journey short of London Birdge at Farringdon?

 

[island]

Is there in fact a restriction applicable to the return portion of a London Bridge-Stevenage ticket that prohibits termination of its holder's journey short of London Birdge at Farringdon?

There is not. The only restriction breached is travel at an invalid time, which you have already addressed earlier.

I would further observe that the ticket from Finsbury Park to Farringdon, which the passenger handed over, was a valid ticket.

As I said in post #7, the evidence tendered does not raise a case to answer.

 

[AlterEgo]

As I said in post #7, the evidence tendered does not raise a case to answer.

Not for the offence charged, certainly not.

 

[gr045]

@island @Hadders @John Palmer @30907

Thank you all for weighing in. To clarify, I did not return the response to the intention to prosecute, I did not send the letter in time. So whilst it is dated 30/01/25, I have just uploaded this for reference rather than as part of the conversation between myself and the train company. Therefore please disregard any info in this letter.

I gather that the offense I have committed is therefore travelling on an off-peak ticket between Stevenage and Finsbury Park.

Do you therefore agree it would be acceptable for me to respond to the SJPN with not guilty and write to the prosecutor as per John's post #10?

Thanks again.

 

[Hadders]

The best way of keeping this out of court is to engage with GTR. I don't know what the deadline is for returning the SJPN but try and engage with GTR and get an answer from them before the deadline. If this isn't possible then pleading Not Guilty will buy more time to engage but there is a risk that if the case ends up in court, and you are found guilty, that the fine and costs will be higher.

Based on what you've told us, technically all you had to pay was an excess fare but the purchase of the FPK to ZFD ticket muddies the water a little. If you want to kee this out of court then you need to get in contact with GTR urgently.

 

[gr045]

Hi everyone, thank you very much for your help with this. I spoke to GTR based on your advice to better understand the offence. After a brief discussion they decided to withdraw the case since the paper ticket was valid, and I will be more careful buying tickets in future!

Thank you!

 

[island]

Hi everyone, thank you very much for your help with this. I spoke to GTR based on your advice to better understand the offence. After a brief discussion they decided to withdraw the case since the paper ticket was valid, and I will be more careful buying tickets in future!

Thank you!

Glad to hear common sense has broken out.

Do make sure to get this all in writing, or at the very least write a letter/email to them and the court along the lines of "thank you for confirming you will be withdrawing this case".

I would not want there to be any chance that the case goes ahead in court and you are convicted.

 

[John Palmer]

Glad to see this had been resolved sensibly.

 

[Hadders]

Thanks for updating us.