Train fine/prosecution for not producing a ticket?

[buzzar]

I am from Cardiff and travel using the Arriva Trains Wales Network (from Radyr Station to Cardiff Queen Street Station if this helps)

So, about a month ago I got on a train at Station A and traveled to Station B. I did not buy a ticket at Station A because I knew I could either get a ticket from the conductor on the train or at Station B. However, since no conductor was present on the train that day (at least not in the carriage) I decided I could then buy my ticket at Station B.

So, I'm at Station B waiting in the queue to buy the ticket. I asked for a return from Station A to Station B. The man said that he couldn't offer me a ticket and that I had to talk to another man, who just so happened to be a Transport Investigator. He took me aside and accused me of having intent to avoid paying a train fare. I fail to see how this could be possible because I was just in the queue trying to buy a ticket, where I was refused a ticket only to then be cautioned for not having a ticket? This doesn't make sense because the reason I didn't have a ticket is because you wouldn't sell me one? It's not like I tried to leave the Station without paying, in which case I would own up to having no intent to pay a train fare and accept any consequences. (I compare this to a shop where you don't pay for each item as you are walking around, you pay at the end. If you leave the shop without paying, then you have no intent to pay for those items and only then should you be treated as a criminal)

Anyway, the other day I got a letter in the post stating there was enough evidence to warrant a prosecution and I may have to appear in court to receive a fine. Would my story hold up in court? It's not like a have a criminal record at current and I usually buy a seasonal ticket (and have done for several years) but this travel was a one off journey and I have in the past, as well as other people, brought a ticket at my destination Station or on the train. Would the fact that they refused to sell my a ticket before I was pulled aside make any difference, surely this shows that I obviously did have some intent to purchase a ticket? I don't see the point of having these ticket facilities at the destination Station if they're going to refuse me a ticket anyway.

I think the offense in which they are trying to accuse of is show in the Railway ByeLaw Section 18(1). However, I feel this is a very bad law and should be changed to suit the views of modern train passengers who travel on trains with the idea that they can be sold a ticket on the train or at their destination. The law should only be able to prosecute people who actually refuse to pay for a ticket/don't have means of paying for a ticket/try to leave the Station without paying for a ticket.

Sorry for rambling, but I really don't feel like I have committed a criminal offense and really don't want to have a criminal record from this. Is there any point appealing this conviction or would it make no difference or would the fact that I'm appealing make it look like I'm guilty? Would my history of buying seasonal ticket for many years count in my favour?

Thanks in advance for any advice you could offer me!

 

[Mark_H]

Others will hopefully give you advice, but the first question to be asked will be: was it technically possible to purchase a ticket at Radyr? i.e. was the ticket office open and/or a ticket machine available? Did anything prevent you buying a ticket i.e. broken ticket machine?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Let's just deal with the suggestion that its "a bad law and should be changed" before turning to your personal situation. The Railways loose a vast amount of money every day as a consequence of passengers not paying any or some of their due fare. It is surely the habits of those passengers who deserve the consideration "bad" and "should be changed"?
A catchall law which allows those passengers who travelled without a ticket to be investigated for a minor offence which doesn't carry a criminal record seems to be an appropriate tool in the struggle to reduce fare evasion.

Now, in your case, we will assume that your opening description is slightly incomplete - you say : "I did not buy a ticket at Station A because I knew I could either get a ticket from the conductor on the train or at Station B" but presumably you will agree that buying a ticket from the station at the beginning of the journey would have been the proper thing to do, and would have averted any of the subsequent difficulties. What were the real reasons for not buying a ticket at Station A? That's the explanation which the investigators will be looking for.

If this is the first time that you have been detected travelling without a ticket and you cooperated with the inspector when being questioned, then I'll guess that if you reply with a suitable apology and assurance for the future, then the Company might accept your explanation, or might expect some compensation for their administrative time in investigating your ticketless travel.

The assumption which the Inspector at your destination will have been enquiring into is the probability that you wouldn't have bothered to queue for a ticket at the destination if you hadn't noticed him/her. I'll also guess that you were asked about that possibility at the time and that your answer was not persuasive.

But if not, then a Railway Byelaw prosecution for a low value fare is not likely to be a particularly serious offence. Best to accept the fact that you were, technically, at fault, and that the Railways must continue to be vigilant in detecting evasion.

Probably not what you wanted to hear but hope it helps.

 

[W230]

It's not like I tried to leave the Station without paying, in which case I would own up to having no intent to pay a train fare and accept any consequences.

The reason they have this law is as DaveNewcastle says, to try and stem the flow of lost revenue from people leaving a station and failing to buy tickets. Imagine a station where there are no barriers/no ticket staff. People could just walk out of the station on arrival having said they were going to buy a ticket at the end of their journey. I'm sure you can see that this system would be more than a little flawed! So, the requirement is to have a valid ticket for your entire journey because it helps to stop this happening -anyone who is going to buy a ticket can usually do so before they travel, whereas anyone who isn't going to bother still won't do and may then get caught without a ticket. That's the idea anyway...As you say, it's not the case here but you'd be amazed how many people suddenly decide to buy a ticket at the end of their journey on realising the station they have just left at has revenue staff/barriers!

(I compare this to a shop where you don't pay for each item as you are walking around, you pay at the end. If you leave the shop without paying, then you have no intent to pay for those items and only then should you be treated as a criminal)

Perhaps. Or look at it like a bus/air travel etc where you have to pay for the journey prior to setting off. It's a bit different to a shop as you can decide to leave the shop without buying services/goods. But once you've got on the train you're already using the service being provided.

 

[ian959]

However, I feel this is a very bad law and should be changed to suit the views of modern train passengers who travel on trains with the idea that they can be sold a ticket on the train or at their destination.

Aside from the loss of revenue another reason for the bye law is to help emphasise the fact that you should have a valid ticket for your journey before you board a train. The only exception to this is where there are no facilities at the station you boarded at to purchase a ticket before you travel.

I would therefore guess that in this instance Station A does in fact have facilities to purchase a ticket in which case you did not have a valid ticket for your journey. If this is true then your story holds no water - your first opportunity to buy a ticket was at Station A which you did not take and therefore you are it seems guilty of intent to travel without paying the appropriate fare.

I am no expert but if Station A does have facilities to purchase a ticket, everything that happened at Station B in your story is irrelevant as far as explaining your actions. Your first action at Station A is all that matters.

 

[snail]

I compare this to a shop where you don't pay for each item as you are walking around, you pay at the end.

Try that at Argos. They won't hand over goods without payment. Do you pay before going in to the cinema? There are lots of examples either way, none relevant here because the railway has laws and byelaws that specify what you have to do.

 

[455driver]

Sorry for rambling, but I really don't feel like I have committed a criminal offense and really don't want to have a criminal record from this.

Others will cover the rest of your post better than I can but with reference to the above bit-

Because they are going for the (strict liability) bye-law 18 offence you will not get a criminal record, just a fine!

 

[bb21]

I am from Cardiff and travel using the Arriva Trains Wales Network (from Radyr Station to Cardiff Queen Street Station if this helps)

So, about a month ago I got on a train at Station A and traveled to Station B. I did not buy a ticket at Station A because I knew I could either get a ticket from the conductor on the train or at Station B. However, since no conductor was present on the train that day (at least not in the carriage) I decided I could then buy my ticket at Station B.

I assume from this that Station A is not Radyr and the journey in question is not one of your regular journeys?

Why did you not buy a ticket beforehand? Is there a ticket office open at the time you wanted to travel? Was there a working ticket machine?

So, I'm at Station B waiting in the queue to buy the ticket. I asked for a return from Station A to Station B. The man said that he couldn't offer me a ticket and that I had to talk to another man, who just so happened to be a Transport Investigator. He took me aside and accused me of having intent to avoid paying a train fare. I fail to see how this could be possible because I was just in the queue trying to buy a ticket, where I was refused a ticket only to then be cautioned for not having a ticket? This doesn't make sense because the reason I didn't have a ticket is because you wouldn't sell me one?

If there were ticket-purchasing facilities at the origin station then this point is moot. Without knowledge of where you started your journey, all we can really do is speculation rather than offering you the most appropriate advice.

So the question goes back to "Does your origin station have an open ticket office when you intended to travel, or a working ticket machine?"

It's not like I tried to leave the Station without paying, in which case I would own up to having no intent to pay a train fare and accept any consequences. (I compare this to a shop where you don't pay for each item as you are walking around, you pay at the end. If you leave the shop without paying, then you have no intent to pay for those items and only then should you be treated as a criminal)

These are not comparable situations.

Anyway, the other day I got a letter in the post stating there was enough evidence to warrant a prosecution and I may have to appear in court to receive a fine. Would my story hold up in court?

Your story will not help you in a Byelaw prosecution.

It's not like a have a criminal record at current and I usually buy a seasonal ticket (and have done for several years) but this travel was a one off journey and I have in the past, as well as other people, brought a ticket at my destination Station or on the train. Would the fact that they refused to sell my a ticket before I was pulled aside make any difference, surely this shows that I obviously did have some intent to purchase a ticket?

I don't think "intent" can be demonstrated, unless you incriminated yourself during the interview on the spot or in your replies to their letters, however a Byelaw conviction does not require "intent" to be proven.

I don't see the point of having these ticket facilities at the destination Station if they're going to refuse me a ticket anyway.

They are there mainly to sell tickets to people before they commence their journeys, or to people who came from unstaffed stations who have not had an opportunity to pay prior to arrival.

I think the offense in which they are trying to accuse of is show in the Railway ByeLaw Section 18(1). However, I feel this is a very bad law

The Byelaws have been challenged before unsuccessfully.

and should be changed to suit the views of modern train passengers who travel on trains with the idea that they can be sold a ticket on the train or at their destination.

That is incorrect. You are seriously misinformed if you genuinely thought that. You are required to purchase your travel ticket before you start your journey unless there is no facilities to do so, or if you are given permission by railway staff.

The law should only be able to prosecute people who actually refuse to pay for a ticket/don't have means of paying for a ticket/try to leave the Station without paying for a ticket.

There are plenty of people who only pay up when challenged. There needs to be incentives to purchase before you board, and the incentive is not get prosecuted to put it simply.

Sorry for rambling, but I really don't feel like I have committed a criminal offense and really don't want to have a criminal record from this.

If your origin station had ticket-purchasing facilities and you ignored it, then you have committed a criminal offence. Although if you are only prosecuted under the Byelaws then conviction should not result in a criminal record.

Is there any point appealing this conviction or would it make no difference or would the fact that I'm appealing make it look like I'm guilty?

You are guilty of the Byelaw offence unless there were no ticket purchasing facilities where you started your journey.

Would my history of buying seasonal ticket for many years count in my favour?

For a Byelaw prosecution? No.

Thanks in advance for any advice you could offer me!

You're welcome. I am sorry that this is probably not what you wanted to hear.

 

[johnb]

Probably worth clarifying for the OP's benefit (people have mentioned it, but I'm not sure I'd be able to follow if I was new to this whole malarkey): there are two different kinds of prosecution for not paying your train fare.

The one you're being prosecuted under is Bylaw 18(1), which in layman's terms bans travelling without a ticket or a good reason for not having one. You didn't have a ticket or a good reason (according to the law's definition), so you're guilty of this.

The one you're not being prosecuted under is Regulation of Railways Act Section 5, which in layman's terms bans deliberately evading your fare. You aren't being prosecuted under this, because you didn't deliberately evade your fare.

The good news is that while Bylaw 18(1) carries a fine and costs, it does not give you a criminal record. It will not appear in CRB checks and you will not be obliged to disclose the conviction to your current or future employer.

Others here may be able to advise you on the likely fine + costs, and Arriva Trains Wales's attitude towards people facing Bylaw 18(1) prosecutions who write them a letter offering to pay the full fare plus their administrative costs in exchange for dropping the prosecution.

(SOAPBOX: I personally don't think Bylaw 18(1) is a sensible use of resources: since the penalty is solely financial and there's no criminal record involved, it should be replaced by an extension of the Penalty Fares system that doesn't tie up the under-resourced courts system, but just creates a civil debt to the TOC. The only offences to see court should be the ones where the maximum penalty that can be imposed isn't just a cash payment. But that's not how the law currently works, so my views and the OP's views are completely irrelevant as to what he should do next.)

 

[buzzar]

Thank you all for your reply, I guess I was just in a bad mood yesterday and didn't want to admit anything. But now I agree that I really should have brought a ticket BEFORE travelling on the train.

Instead of appealing I am going to write a letter of apology, stating that I was in the wrong and that I won't be making this mistake again in the future. I'm also going to ask if this matter could be dealt with outside of court and that I'm willing to pay any unpaided fares and administration costs. Do you think this is the sensible option? I wasn't aggressive in any way to the staff that questioned me and I'm going to admit my fault and pay anything I owe, so I don't see why they should fight back against me for doing this?

Thanks again for clearing everything up for me, everyone gave great detail in there answer and I really appreciate it.

 

[W230]

(SOAPBOX: I personally don't think Bylaw 18(1) is a sensible use of resources: since the penalty is solely financial and there's no criminal record involved, it should be replaced by an extension of the Penalty Fares system that doesn't tie up the under-resourced courts system, but just creates a civil debt to the TOC. The only offences to see court should be the ones where the maximum penalty that can be imposed isn't just a cash payment. But that's not how the law currently works, so my views and the OP's views are completely irrelevant as to what he should do next.)

I can see your point though I think if it was a civil debt then it is harder to enforce than a fine issued by the court, though by no means impossible.

Also (at the risk of starting a big argument) some people who fail to buy tickets and are prosecuted are really afraid of ending up in court. I think this may be because some of these people consider themselves good law abiding citizens from good backgrounds with good jobs and would be horrified at the thought of ending up in court over something which they would consider a "silly ticket inspector jobsworth out to get me". Certainly, this is what I have been told by a former RPI I work with who works with one of our regularly featured TOCs.

You only have to look at the hordes of prosecution posts in here of people saying "how can I avoid ending up in court". In fact this very thread is one!

 

[Flamingo]

ATW are (finally) starting to crack down on fare evasion.

I find that the "pay when challenged and not a moment before" evasion is endemic, and it's going to be an uphill struggle to change the mindset of a generation, as the "you've gotta try, bud" mentality is used to the only consequences of some pretty blatant fraudulent behaviour is having to buy a cheap-day return on the odd occasion the guard manages to catch them.

Expect lots more of this kind of thread from the valleys.

 

[buzzar]

I'm not going to use this as an argument (although I will mention it in my letter) but I have in the past brought a ticket at Queen Street station when travelling from Radyr (aka not buying a ticket before I got on the train) and not been stopped/questioned/etc.
And, I'm sure if I go in tomorrow and try to buy a ticket at Queen Street station then they will sell me a ticket without asking me why I don't already have one.

I don't see how they can enforce a rule on a single day and then not on other days? Either you enforce the rule all the time or not at all. Anyone have an opinion on this?

 

[Flamingo]

You enforce it when you can. It discourages people from trying it on. It's the same principle behind speed traps.

 

[RPI]

I have noticed that ATW have also put up posters everywhere highlighting that prosecution is the end result if you don't buy before you board and the same message is displayed on all of their timetable posters so it is quite clear, ATW will have a tough time changing attitudes in South Wales, when i used to work along the south wales main line to say that opportunist fare evasion was rife was an understatement!

 

[district]

I'm not going to use this as an argument (although I will mention it in my letter) but I have in the past brought a ticket at Queen Street station when travelling from Radyr (aka not buying a ticket before I got on the train) and not been stopped/questioned/etc.

I agree that rules should be enforced more consistently to prevent people thinking that it is acceptable to buy a ticket on the train or at the destination but unfortunately they are clearly trying to do this by cracking down on it and I think you need to accept that you are in the wrong in this instance.

Certainly there will be many guards who will be happy to sell a full range of tickets on board, whether it because of commission, not wanting a confrontation or otherwise. I think this will be addressed with companies such as ATW and Northern especially taking a harder line on those leaving it to the destination to buy the ticket, but they also need to remind staff to follow the rules every single time to prevent inconsistencies happening which cause passengers to get into trouble.

Why didn't you just buy a ticket at Radyr or wherever your origin was, though?

 

[Flamingo]

Enforcing the rules is easier when at a ticket gate accompanied by two or three other revenue staff and backed up with security staff and/or BTP than on your own on a train with a succession of unmanned stations coming up, and the certain knowledge that if anything kicks off your manager will say you should have left them alone.

I personally will point out to people that although I am selling them the cheap ticket, they should have bought it at the station. The normal response in South Wales is either laughter (males) or indignation (females).

The difference in price (if it exists) on the majority of journeys between the off-peak and anytime fare is at most £1, hardly a deterrent.

South Wales at his stage requires a large number of Revenue staff with some authority to prosecute (as opposed to gate line staff / ATE's) and a Penalty Fare system in place. ATW are VERY unlikely to spend the money on either.

 

[6Gman]

Thank you all for your reply, I guess I was just in a bad mood yesterday and didn't want to admit anything. But now I agree that I really should have brought a ticket BEFORE travelling on the train.

Possibly not relevant but can you explain why you didn't buy the ticket before travelling?

 

[buzzar]

I don't have a reason for not buying a ticket before boarding the train. There was somebody in the queue at Radyr and since I was so used to either buying tickets on the train or at the destination station, I thought nothing of it and went straight to the platform wihtout waiting in the queue. Since I hadn't been stopped before, it didn't cross my mind that today would be the day. I know it's not an excuse, but it was a little out of the blue. It was only after I got the caution that I noticed all the signs in each station, but obviously this was too late.
I don't think they made a big enough point about it before I was cautioned. That along with the fact that I had brought tickets on the train and at the destination station before just made the whole experience strange for me.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter now. I've sent my letter of apology, admiting my wrong and stating that I want to settle this matter out of court by asking for any arrangements they have for me to pay any outstanding fares and fees that I owe. Hopefully they should get back to me soon and this can be sorted without any hassle.

 

[island]

Please do come back and let us know the outcome, if you don't mind.

 

[jon0844]

Has anyone noticed that we've had a lot of posts that are very similarly worded to earlier ones? Is there a template going around or something?

 

[buzzar]

Has anyone noticed that we've had a lot of posts that are very similarly worded to earlier ones? Is there a template going around or something?

I've been actively replying on two different forums, using pretty much the same wording, if that's what you mean. I haven't used a template, just both forums have similar wording, if not copied. My story doesn't change for each forum so just though this was easier.

Sorry if I've caused any confusion.

 

[johnb]

Also (at the risk of starting a big argument) some people who fail to buy tickets and are prosecuted are really afraid of ending up in court. I think this may be because some of these people consider themselves good law abiding citizens from good backgrounds with good jobs and would be horrified at the thought of ending up in court over something which they would consider a "silly ticket inspector jobsworth out to get me". Certainly, this is what I have been told by a former RPI I work with who works with one of our regularly featured TOCs.

But a lot of this is because people don't understand the difference between an 18(1) prosecution and a RoRA(5) prosecution.

Which is understandable - the only reason I found it out a fair while ago was because a trainee lawyer I knew was being prosecuted under 18(1) and she thought it was going to destroy her career. Which it would had done, had she been prosecuted under RoRA(5).

I get the point that bringing an 18(1) prosecution terrifies the bejesus out of people in a way that a PF doesn't, but I'm not sure that's a particularly honest way of going about things.

At the very least, 18(1) letters should make clear to the defendant that the offence in question does not carry a criminal record (a bit melodramatic, perhaps, but I can imagine a highly strung young person with career aspirations doing something very stupid indeed if they received an 18(1) letter and they thought it'd give them a record and wreck their life...)

 

[island]

That could cause its own problems given the changes coming up to the criminal records system.

 

[CNash]

I too think more consistency is needed when applying this rule. I can't count the number of threads I've seen in this forum where the unlucky traveller has genuinely believed that buying a ticket on the train, or at their destination, is acceptable - mainly due to having done so several times before with no problems. They are then completely nonplussed when they make a train journey, do the same thing again, and are suddenly threated with prosecution!

I was "caught out" the same way several years ago. Apparently, the purpose of ticket windows behind the gateline labelled "Customers with fares to pay" isn't as clear-cut as it appears...

 

[johnb]

That could cause its own problems given the changes coming up to the criminal records system.

Fancy elaborating? (not a sarcastic qn)

 

[BillyBoy]

I too think more consistency is needed when applying this rule. I can't count the number of threads I've seen in this forum where the unlucky traveller has genuinely believed that buying a ticket on the train, or at their destination, is acceptable - mainly due to having done so several times before with no problems. They are then completely nonplussed when they make a train journey, do the same thing again, and are suddenly threated with prosecution!

I was "caught out" the same way several years ago. Apparently, the purpose of ticket windows behind the gateline labelled "Customers with fares to pay" isn't as clear-cut as it appears...

Exactly! In Skipton, despite there being a usually open ticket office and a recently added TVM, people “know” that they can just walk onto the train and buy a ticket from the guard and the guard will be happy to sell them one. It’s been that way for the 20 years I’ve lived there and I don’t know anyone who has thought otherwise. It’s only by coming here for ticket advice and reading some of the other forums that I have become aware of byelaw 18 and its strict liability. Northern Rail would have a field day if they decided to enforce it in Skipton as they appear to have elsewhere and there would be an awful lot of unlucky passengers.

 

[sarahj]

What is coming, and in fact has come for some lines is, if you board a train at a place where ticket issuing facilites were available, all the conductor on the train will be able to sell you is a anytime ticket. Thats no savers, no railcard discounts, no super off peak, just anytime singles and returns. All other fares will be removed from the avantix.

ps, dont shoot the messenger. This is being pushed by those on high, and being fought by those on the ground. Nothing calms a train full of drunks out for the night than selling them a cheap day single group ticket.

 

[johnb]

SarahJ: It's a reasonable policy, but not quite what we're talking about here. An Anytime Single is not a penalty fare or a prosecution, and for a long time train crew have had the right to say "buy an Anytime or I'll write you up". It's interesting they're actually removing it from the Avantix though, and a fair point about the risk to you guys that the lack of discretion might cause.

I got shafted by an offshoot of this on SWT once, which was a bit galling. I was on a Waterloo-Guildford train, stopping at Clapham, with a valid Z12 Travelcard & Gold Card.

The queue at Waterloo to acquire a Clapham-Guildford Gold Card ticket was horrific (wish they'd sell those from machines) so I got on the train and made sure I found the guard before Clapham to buy a ticket for the part of the journey I hadn't started yet - and he'd only sell me an non-Gold Card, Anytime fare. "We're not allowed to sell any discounted tickets on board, even if you've got a valid ticket for the journey you're currently doing".

 

[island]

If they're removing it from the Avantix machine, how will that work with unmanned stations or stations where the only working ticketing facility is out of order?