ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
It's not necessary for the appeal to be successful, or to have valid grounds. You could appeal on the basis that you don't like Northern and shouldn't have to pay therefore. If the appeal was rejected you still wouldn't be able to be prosecuted.The law doesn't expect that at all if the grounds for appeal are he would rather not pay it. He had no grounds for appeal, under the law as I quoted above, therefore the TOC is perfectly entitled under law to prosecute if he doesn't pay.
The relevant provision is—
Subparagraph (a) is not about whether the appeal was allowed. It is about whether the Appeal Panel have decided the outcome of an appeal. That could be that the appeal is unsuccessful for whatever reason, but it is a decision about the outcome. The need for an appeal to be successful isn't in there anywhere, because it doesn't exist.(3) Where a person falling within paragraph (1)(a) has appealed against the penalty fare under regulation 16, proceedings for any of the offences specified in paragraph (4) may only be brought against that person for the same failure to produce a platform ticket or a valid travel ticket if the operator, on whose behalf the penalty fare was charged, notifies the relevant Appeal Panel that the penalty fare is cancelled before—
(a)the relevant Appeal Panel has decided the outcome of the appeal under regulation 16; or
(b)the time period mentioned in paragraph 6 of Schedule 2 expires,
whichever is sooner.
As it is, the Regulations essentially force a train company to stick with their decision to issue a Penalty Fare in regularisation of an offence, unless the passenger fails to pay and fails to appeal - i.e. they fail to engage with the system at all. If they do engage then the TOC's right to prosecute is lost, as a balancing force against the ability to reverse the normal burden of proof.
This is all quite reasonable and it simply stops the TOC from having it both ways - issuing a penalty against the passenger with a reversed burden of proof, and then reverting to the might of the Criminal Courts when that doesn't suit them any more. They have every right to continue to pursue unpaid Penalty Fares as far as the County Courts. That they don't is their decision and not one for which passengers can be penalised.