Statute barred penalty fare?

[Surprised101]

Hi all.
I just received a letter today, Notice of Intended Prosecution, for a penalty fare back in January 2014 !!

I think it relates to a DLR journey where my oyster did not have enough credits. I gave my details to the inspector at the time but never heard from them again.

I have not received anything prior to today. The penalty is now £110, probably including charges.

The penalty is over 6 years old, is it now statute barred?

 

[robbeech]

is the documentation dated for 2014, or more recently. As far as i was aware, most of these things have to be dealt with, or at least started within 6 months.
It's not unheard of for mail to be misplaced for some time and only found years later although i would have thought there would have been further correspondence at the time.

Which operator is this for? There are only a small number of operators from 2014 that still exist in the same form.

 

[Surprised101]

is the documentation dated for 2014, or more recently. As far as i was aware, most of these things have to be dealt with, or at least started within 6 months.
It's not unheard of for mail to be misplaced for some time and only found years later although i would have thought there would have been further correspondence at the time.

Which operator is this for? There are only a small number of operators from 2014 that still exist in the same form.

Thx. The letter is dated May 2020 and quotes the date of penalty as Jan 2014 with reminders allegedly sent Feb 2014 and March 2014.
The TOC is DLR (docklands light railway) so guess its transport for london.

 

[Surprised101]

By the way. The letter is from a company called IRCAS

 

[30907]

By the way. The letter is from a company called IRCAS

IRCAS is Independent Revenue Collection and Support (which) assists the transport industry in the administration and collection of outstanding penalty notices. That's normal, but the time lapse story is strange.
1. When you first incurred the penalty, did you check that the staff member noted your name and address correctly? And would letters correctly addressed have reached you back then (i.e. you weren't at another address temporarily)?
2. Are they inviting you to pay £110 to avoid prosecution? Or to avoid civil debt proceedings?

 

[Surprised101]

Thx.
IRCAS are asking me to pay the full amount of £110 within 14 days or they will commence legal proceedings.

Back in 2014 I was in rented accomodation and did move house in that year, but, i always set up a redirection service. Still never received anything.

Im also thinking whether they should even still be retaining my data. I thought companies had to shred personal data after 6 years??

I believe penalty fares are civil debts which leads me to think the statute of limitation applies and its statute barred after 6 years (Jan 2020).
?
Thanks.

 

[30907]

I am not one of the forum's experts, but until one appears...
1. Does the letter refer specifically to a Penalty Fare? If so, did you receive anything in writing at the time you were challenged? The regulations require this - and also state that they can only pursue the unpaid PF as a civil debt (as you have noted)
If not, what offence are they proposing to prosecute you for?
Please feel free to upload an anonymised picture of the letter/s so someone can comment.

Either way, I think they are out of time. Perhaps they aren't busy and are trawling their files....

 

[ainsworth74]

This is interesting! I think in terms of being able to bring criminal proceedings they've missed their window as such charges I believe have to be laid within six months of the alleged offence so that's one thing. But in terms of whether or not the Penalty Fare is still a live issue I honestly don't know. The Penalty Fare regulations don't appear to include a time limit for how long the company has to chase up a Penalty Fare and I'm also not sure how the law regarding statute barred debts might interact with this either.

On the data protection point you're supposed to keep data only for as long as you need it and need to think about your justification for that period (so "just because" wouldn't fly but "our insurer requires we keep it for six years in case of a legal claim" likely would). So I wouldn't automatically assume that just because they've had your data for so long means that they've acted in contravention of the data protection act though you could of course complain to them about it and see what they say!

My opinion (and as always I'm a random bloke on the internet not a lawyer) is that a Penalty Fare is a civil debt which is provided for by Regulation 12 of the The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018:

Recovery of penalty fare as a civil debt

12.—(1) Where a person charged a penalty fare under regulation 5(1) has not paid the penalty fare in full, the operator on whose behalf the penalty fare was charged may recover the amount outstanding as a civil debt in any of the following circumstances—

(a)the person did not appeal under regulation 16 against the penalty fare within the 21 day period provided for by regulation 16(1)(a);​

​

(b)the person—​

​

(i)appealed under regulation 16 within that period;​

​

(ii)the relevant Appeal Panel notified the person that it had not allowed the appeal;​

​

(iii)the relevant Appeal Panel adhered to the time period specified in paragraph 6 of Schedule 2; and​

​

(iv)the person did not appeal under regulation 17 against that decision within the 14 day period provided for by regulation 17(1)(a);​

​

(c)the person—​

​

(i)appealed under regulation 17 within that period;​

​

(ii)the relevant Appeal Panel notified the person that it had not allowed the appeal;​

​

(iii)the relevant Appeal Panel adhered to the time period specified in paragraph 6 of Schedule 2; and​

​

(iv)the person did not appeal under regulation 18 against that decision within the 14 day period provided for by regulation 18(1)(a); or​

​

(d)the person—​

​

(i)appealed under regulation 18 within that period;​

​

(ii)the relevant Final Appeal Panel notified the person that it had not allowed the appeal; and​

​

(iii)the period of 14 days, beginning with the day following the day on which the notice of that decision was received, has elapsed.​

Which is a long winded way of saying where a Penalty Fare has been charged and not paid in full it can be recovered as a civil debt as long as the person hasn't appealed or has appealed and having lost their appeal has not paid. Normally this is a fairly irrelevant provision because most of the time if a PF isn't paid the company who charged it are able to withdraw it and go for a criminal prosecution instead as this this all shakes out within six months. But not so here!

So, my thought is, that at this point it may very well be statute barred and IRCAS, despite their threat, may find that they cannot attempt to recover it via a money claim. However I am aware that this can be quite a complex area of law (it certainly seemed to tie debt advisers I worked with up in knots from time to time) so I would suggest that you proceed with caution before ignoring it. This is actually an area that Citizens Advice may be able to assist with at least in terms of whether it might be statute barred as it is basically a debt issue. Also National Debtline have quite a comprehensive factsheet on this on their website (they also offer a good webchat service). You can find it here.

But, what with me not being a lawyer, I'm also not 100% certain that there may not be an exemption to the six month rule regarding bringing criminal proceedings that they may yet be able to use.

 

[Surprised101]

Thx.
These are a fantastic help. Thanks to all. I will upload an anonymised copy of the letter and also contact the national debtline webchat.

Then i shall draft a reply in the next few days and upload for a lookover by you guys/gals.

Thanks n watch this space - but keep the replies coming!

 

[packermac]

I too am no expert but it would appear to be outside the six year window allowed for a criminal prosecution. But I do not have enough Law knowledge to understand civil liability if any.
Does what IRCAS have sent you say if they are proposing a criminal or civil prosecution?

I do wonder if the lack of fare evasion in these COVID times has hit their bottom line and they are going back through old cases in the hope that x% will just cough up to avoid any issues going forward.

 

[Surprised101]

Copy of letter attached. Jpeg format.
It does seem to be headed as a non payment of penalty fare.
Take a look.

 

[packermac]

You may not remember now but 22.2 of the TFL bylaws states
The authorised person requesting details under Byelaw 22(1) shall state the nature of the suspected breach of the Byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.

Did this happen? and clause 23 says

23. Offence and level of fines


Any person who breaches any of the Byelaws commits an offence and may be liable for each such offence to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

I have no idea what a level 3 penalty is.

 

[221129]

You may not remember now but 22.2 of the TFL bylaws states
The authorised person requesting details under Byelaw 22(1) shall state the nature of the suspected breach of the Byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.

Did this happen? and clause 23 says

23. Offence and level of fines


Any person who breaches any of the Byelaws commits an offence and may be liable for each such offence to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

I have no idea what a level 3 penalty is.

None of which is relevant for a Penalty Fare.

 

[ainsworth74]

Copy of letter attached. Jpeg format.
It does seem to be headed as a non payment of penalty fare.
Take a look.

Yes my, none lawyer, view would be as I said previously it appears that they're trying to pursue it as a civil debt rather than criminal in which case there is every possibility that it is statute barred. I would suggest speaking to National Debtline to see if they're able to offer any advice in that circumstance.

 

[ainsworth74]

You may not remember now but 22.2 of the TFL bylaws states
The authorised person requesting details under Byelaw 22(1) shall state the nature of the suspected breach of the Byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.

Did this happen? and clause 23 says

23. Offence and level of fines


Any person who breaches any of the Byelaws commits an offence and may be liable for each such offence to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

I have no idea what a level 3 penalty is.

From the letter that the OP has now posted this does not appear to be a matter relating to TfL's (or anyone else's) Byelaws and is very much a Penalty Fare issue.

 

[furlong]

That's not a great letter - surely a PF on the DLR won't have been issued for the enormous sum of £110, so what's the breakdown of (and complete basis for) their claim? How can you be expected to remember the details after over 6 years? Merely say you dispute the debt and should there be legal proceedings you may invoke the Limitation Act in defence?

If you think a fare might still be unpaid for the journey and can remember roughly how much extra you should have paid then without admitting anything maybe send them a cheque for that (presumably tiny) amount as full and final settlement? (I.e. no extra charges or penalty.) Edit: See follow-ups - beware of resetting the clock.

 

[30907]

Reading the letter, they are going correctly down the civil debt route, despite being out of time (and referring to it as a prosecution, which it doesn't appear to be.).
I think we need to know if a PF was issued in the first place!

 

[hkstudent]

I am not sure whether this case has even passed the window for pursuing a County Court Judgement (for civil debt way)?

Out of Date Debt | Debt Help Guides | ClearDebt

If you haven’t heard from an organisation you owe money to or acknowledged the debt you owe in any way for six years or more, you may not have to pay it

cleardebt.co.uk

Check if you have to pay a debt

How to check liability for a debt, including time limits on debts and how to challenge a debt you think you might not be liable for.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk

 

[ainsworth74]

I am not sure whether this case has even passed the window for pursuing a County Court Judgement (for civil debt way)?

Yes that's the question and why we've been discussion whether or not the debt is statute barred

 

[gray1404]

I would personally not respond to the letter. Then you cannot be accused of admitting a debt is owed. They are put of time for both civil (6 years since last contact) and criminal (6 months since date of incident) proceedings.

 

[CrispyUK]

As gray1404 has mentioned, and from what I recall of reading up on civil debts whilst helping a friend several years ago, you do need to be careful with your wording if you respond to this so as not to restart the six year clock again from zero.

 

[hkstudent]

As gray1404 has mentioned, and from what I recall of reading up on civil debts whilst helping a friend several years ago, you do need to be careful with your wording if you respond to this so as not to restart the six year clock again from zero.

Indeed.
But I am also concerned that the PF is recorded as outstanding debt in the credit record of OP.
It may be good for OP to do a free of charge "soft" credit search in Money Saving Expert to see whether the "debt" is recorded...

 

[Brissle Girl]

I do wonder if the lack of fare evasion in these COVID times has hit their bottom line and they are going back through old cases in the hope that x% will just cough up to avoid any issues going forward.

I suspect it is more simple than that. With virtually nobody travelling, there won't have been the usual generation of new cases to keep the teams occupied, so I suspect someone has either specifically instigated a review of old unsettled cases to occupy them, or just that the teams are finally getting round to something that they were never resourced to do, but suddenly find they have the time to look at.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

It's important to note that the 6 year period is reset when the alleged debt is acknowledged. For example, any emails, letters or phone calls that the alleged offender may have made discussing the PF within the last 6 years.

I suspect it's a last through of the dice to get some money though, and they are unlikely to chase a CCJ this late.

However, the statue barred defence does not mean the debt disappears, they just can't enforce it through the court. They can continue to chase it if they wish.

 

[MotCO]

However, the statue barred defence does not mean the debt disappears, they just can't enforce it through the court. They can continue to chase it if they wish.

What does this mean in practice? The OP can't pay the debt (whether the cost of the original Penalty Fare or current outstanding debt with costs and interest) without restarting the clock, whereupon the debt can be chased through the Courts. If the OP leaves the debt unpaid, will it show up on credit checks?

 

[shopbford]

To me the letter is mixed up as Notice of Intended Prosecution does indeed refer to a criminal prosecution but they then go on to say it may affect your Credit Rating which is to do to with Civil Debts if they obtain a CCJ. One question to ask has the OP moved address since 2014? Otherwise I would let them do their worst as being SB'd is an absolute defence to a Civil claim.

 

[shopbford]

What does this mean in practice? The OP can't pay the debt (whether the cost of the original Penalty Fare or current outstanding debt with costs and interest) without restarting the clock, whereupon the debt can be chased through the Courts. If the OP leaves the debt unpaid, will it show up on credit checks?

Doesn't matter if it is SB it cannot start the clock ticking again. They can keep asking nicely but best response is to write back and advise it is SB and any future correspondence would be treated as harrasment - Ferguson v British Gas is the one to quote.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

From what I read on these forums, I suspect it's probably worth considering whether to pay up anyway.

I would bet that should the original poster encounter a future problem on the railway in the future, a Train Operator may decide to cut out the prospect of any settlements or goodwill and proceed straight to criminal prosecution, if there is/are outstanding penalties from previously alleged offences.

If you're 100% certain you'll never come to their attention again, you can likely safely ignore it, but they are legally allowed to keep writing/chasing payment, they just can't do anything about it if you ignore them.

 

[t_star2001uk]

Just a couple of questions...

If a penalty fare has been issued, is there a time limit on collection...
Does the Limitations Act apply to railway bylaws and regulations...

 

[ainsworth74]

Just a couple of questions...

If a penalty fare has been issued, is there a time limit on collection...

Well that's the question! My suspicion is that the Limitation Act does apply as to enforce an unpaid Penalty Fare you have to take action via civil means such as the County Court. But that's why the OP would be best advised to access the services of an organisation who are more familiar with the provisions of the relevant act than I suspect any of us here are.

Does the Limitations Act apply to railway bylaws and regulations...

It is a settled matter that a prosecution has to be laid within six months of the offence in order to proceed with a criminal prosecution under the Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act so that time limit is well expired and is, I believe, governed by the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.