• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

TOC County Court Claim

Status
Not open for further replies.

VauxhallandI

Established Member
Joined
26 Dec 2012
Messages
2,744
Location
Cheshunt
Once again TOC's get to live in their own world?

If I receive a wrongly directed letter at work I just pop it in the mail to the correct address.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
15,164
Question 3: Was it sent in time? If it wasn't received within 21 days of the PFN being issued, IPFAS won't consider it. So if you sent it by post on day 20, that's too late, as the delivery target for First Class post is three working days, and five working days for Second Class.
And if it didn't reference the PFN number there would be little hope of being able to do anything with it.
 

Agent_c

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2015
Messages
934
Surely the whole idea of a registered business address is that the company can't argue lack of knowledge if something is sent to them at that address...
 

Llanigraham

On Moderation
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,103
Location
Powys
Registered business address do not have to be where the business "is".
Lots of businesses, even large ones, are registered at holding addresses, like accountants or solicitors offices.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
Registered business address do not have to be where the business "is".
Lots of businesses, even large ones, are registered at holding addresses, like accountants or solicitors offices.

Indeed. But the point of the registered business address is that this is where legal documents about a business should be served. I was told off by a District Judge, when acting as a Mackenzie Friend, because my client had served papers on the address where the business was trading, not where the business was registered.
 

Agent_c

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2015
Messages
934
Registered business address do not have to be where the business "is".
Lots of businesses, even large ones, are registered at holding addresses, like accountants or solicitors offices.

You are correct it doesn't have to be a trading address, but its still where the business "officially" "lives", and thus is the normal place to serve such documents. Otherwise there wouldn't be much of a point in having one.
 
Last edited:

tony6499

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2012
Messages
887
Surely if the OP hasn't appealed against the penalty fare through the proper channels any legal action he commences will end in failure, if he has and it has been ignored or dismissed then he has grounds to further the complaint but it still isn't that clear what he has done or what he is doing, even if the penalty fare was proper as he won't furnish enough details about it.
 

DaleCooper

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2015
Messages
3,513
Location
Mulholland Drive
Surely if the OP hasn't appealed against the penalty fare through the proper channels any legal action he commences will end in failure, if he has and it has been ignored or dismissed then he has grounds to further the complaint but it still isn't that clear what he has done or what he is doing, even if the penalty fare was proper as he won't furnish enough details about it.

This possibility (nobody seems to know for certain) has already been raised but the OP seems confident that it won't be a problem, let's hope he is right.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,167
Location
UK
If the OP wanted to remove any doubt of the eligibility of his ticket from the naysayers, he could privately contact a fares adviser on here (perhaps someone like Yorkie) who could then confirm the ticket was valid. I don't see any need for anyone on this forum to know, although after the OP wins I hope (s)he comes back with the full details, just to satisfy my own curiosity.

I'm glad the OP is fighting back. I've lost count of the number of times so far this year there has been a report on this forum of the railway has extorted, or attempted to extort money, from passengers. I dread to think how widespread the activity is.
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
Once again TOC's get to live in their own world?

If I receive a wrongly directed letter at work I just pop it in the mail to the correct address.

All of this hinges as to why the OP hasnt received any communication from either the TOC concerned nor the appeals service. In both instances it is very rare to hear nothing, especially from the appeals service.

OP - how did you pay for the remainder of the PF and if by cheque was it ever cashed and if by card was it debited from your account?
 

John Palmer

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2015
Messages
245
Given the OP is concerned to establish what costs he may recover in civil proceedings against a TOC, it occurs to me that in my previous post I ought to have mentioned the consequences of such proceedings being allocated to a particular track.

When civil proceedings are defended, the Court will allocate them to one of three case management tracks: the multi track, the fast track or the small claims track. Paragraphs 7.23 and 7.24 of the LiP's Handbook previously mentioned are helpful here in outlining the basis on which proceedings are allocated to a particular track. In the case of proceedings arising from a ticket validity dispute, there is a high probability that such proceedings will give rise to issues of contract law suitable for disposal via the small claims track, because the money sum in issue is likely to be well below the current £10,000 ceiling for small claims track cases.

It's worth noting the caveat about costs contained in para. 7.24 of the LiP’s Handbook: "Only very limited orders for costs may be made in small track cases, essentially limited to fixed costs and expenses [CPR 27.14]". That is the principle usually applied to costs claims in small claims track cases, from which the courts will not normally depart save in cases in which one of the parties' conduct has been so egregious as to justify a costs penalty being imposed on that party.

In a nutshell: a civil law claim that is dealt with in the small claims track is not likely to attract a costs award of anything more than fixed costs and expenses.
 

DaleCooper

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2015
Messages
3,513
Location
Mulholland Drive
I'm glad the OP is fighting back. I've lost count of the number of times so far this year there has been a report on this forum of the railway has extorted, or attempted to extort money, from passengers. I dread to think how widespread the activity is.

Posts on this forum are hardly a random sample of rail users, they are by their very nature self-selected so of course we get a pessimistically skewed view of the situation.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
. . . . I've lost count of the number of times so far this year there has been a report on this forum of the railway has extorted, or attempted to extort money, from passengers. I dread to think how widespread the activity is.
Reports which, if we want to draw any useful conclusions from them, are one-sided, un corroborated, and lacking in a follow-up report of the agreed outcome.

Due to those serious defects, I would advise against even attempting to count them.

I might refer to having "lost count of the number of times so far" that I've heard rail staff talk about fare dodgers encountered, about their hackneyed scams and about their more blatant evasions. But that would have precisely as little value as data as would your lost count.
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,405
Location
Back office
The whole railway ticketing dispute thing is a grand waste of time.

If you ask a ticket seller or inspector for a list of routes your ticket is valid on, there is a good chance they will either blank or make an educated guess for all but the most basic of queries. Same goes for the recipients of these letters. They might defer to an "experienced" colleague who may or may not know what they're talking about when it comes to ticketing validity. If the industry struggles with training its own staff on tickets, I'm not convinced court is the best way forward.

There are some isolated situations where the revenue protection system isn't fit for purpose. One is where staff who don't understand the validity of a ticket decide to issue a penalty notice anyway. If the ticket is valid, I'd go as far as saying the system in place is worthy of undermining. I once telephoned a prosecutions manager directly, explained their mistaken colleagues kept issuing me with those notices and that I wouldn't be wasting any time entertaining them, so they should expect my name to crop up in their workpile eventually.

This proved to be effective in getting open notices cancelled, which I believe is what the objective is here.
 
Last edited:

CheesyChips

Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
217
Reports which, if we want to draw any useful conclusions from them, are one-sided, un corroborated, and lacking in a follow-up report of the agreed outcome.

Due to those serious defects, I would advise against even attempting to count them.

I might refer to having "lost count of the number of times so far" that I've heard rail staff talk about fare dodgers encountered, about their hackneyed scams and about their more blatant evasions. But that would have precisely as little value as data as would your lost count.

A bye-product of trade is always going to be disputes from either side. There are forums out there where people complain about how Sainsbury's lack of customer care breaches every article of the human rights act and people writing letters threatening to take the board to Strasbourg over an out of date chicken madras.

I'm not ageeing/disagreeing with what say here DaveNewcastle, your comment was a useful springboard for mine :)
 

Dent

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2015
Messages
1,112
There are forums out there where people complain about how Sainsbury's lack of customer care breaches every article of the human rights act and people writing letters threatening to take the board to Strasbourg over an out of date chicken madras.

Are there really, or are you making up an absurd straw man argument?

Customer service is absolutely nothing to do with any article of the human rights act, certainly not every article. Expiration dates are a matter for the Food Standards Agency, nothing to do with Strasbourg.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
Your psychic powers are quite remarkable if you can unilaterally determine that my correspondence including initial letter to the TOC was confrontational.

Quite remarkable, top marks to you sir.
Hmm. I was actually trying to assist - and I still am.
kingston said:
I wrote to them twice over the course of 6 months, and wrote to them again last month
. . . .
My last action was to send a letter before action to the TOC, and I am now carrying out action specified
. . . .
I was also complaining about the aggressive behavior of the staff.
My point was to raise questions over the adequacy of your efforts to resolve this out-of-court. You will know the answer to that, not me. But if your correspondence has not been to confront the issues in a robust and challenging form, and have been concilliatory, open-ended, lacking clarity of objective, confused by a complaint about the staff or was pleading, then I would say that they do not demonstrate that adequacy. It appears from these brief quotes that you have been confrontational, and that presumption is not a criticism.

I'm not sure being psychic would be pleasant, but I do try to point out some of the hazards and obstacles which can lie ahead of litigants and I do so in an attempt to inform or assist.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,787
Location
Yorkshire
kingston - please contact us if you have any further information to add, or if there are any further developments. Until then...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top