"Train passenger fined £470 for not paying £2 fare (after he'd just spent £200 on another ticket)"

[Bletchleyite]

If he’d have bought the correct ticket in the first place it wouldn’t have cost any more money.

Or obtained a zero-fare overdistance excess, which some staff go to great lengths to avoid issuing.

 

[falcon]

The railway shouldn’t be prosecuting any case where the passenger had already paid the right amount of money. It’s not about what the law says, it’s a matter of public perception and wielding the powers they have as responsibly as any other prosecutor.

I completely agree that liars, cheats and fraudsters should feel the force of the law.

Non-evasion offences like the failure to show a ticket on demand, as described in the OP should be dealt with through a civil process. It’s entirely wrong to criminalise people in this way.

Imagine if the police were responsible for prosecutions of this kind. There would be uproar at this sort of conduct.

I agree (and so does the RORA 1889) that if no money has been lost then a person should not be 'convicted'(a different word to prosecution and the correct word) of an offence.

But a prosecution(an allegation) is a different thing to a conviction and can result in no conviction and costs awarded to the defendant.

The OP may not have been convicted if he had responed to the prosecution letter.

If he had been prosecucted under the RORA 1889 sec 5 I fail to see how he could be convicted because providing "the fare" has been paid there is no offence. But he needs to contest it and he did not.

So what offence was the OP prosecuted under?

We don't have enough information just a media tale that is selective with what it reveals.

 

[mmh]

Gave his address then moved, or gave his address KNOWING he's going to move? I suspect the latter.

What a remarkably cynical view to take. To the people who think he moved to try to disappear - if you actually read the OP's article he was from Cardiff living away as a student in London, and after finishing his course he moved to Surrey to work. I don't imagine the uptake for the Royal Mail's post redirection service is high for people living in student digs or a hall of residence.

Have some proportionality folks, please. It's clearly nonsense and a ridiculous waste of money to take someone to court for, err evading a zero price fare.

 

[Antman]

I don't think he is suggesting the final point.

Getting your post redirected is straightforward, inexpensive and efficient in my experience. Especially when you have something like this hanging over you. And even if redirection wasn't an option in his circumstances why not advise ATW of the change of address?

Who knows maybe he just forgot about it? I think the issue is more about why any action was taken in the first place for what was clearly an innocent mistake.

 

[PeterC]

Who knows maybe he just forgot about it? I think the issue is more about why any action was taken in the first place for what was clearly an innocent mistake.

Did the RPI know that he had started his journey with a valid ticket or did he just offer to pay from Cardiff when stopped?

 

[farleigh]

So what benefit has come from this prosecution?
I am struggling to think of any benefit to any party.

 

[yorkie]

Did the RPI know that he had started his journey with a valid ticket or did he just offer to pay from Cardiff when stopped?

I can't believe they won't have established where the journey started; if the answer was 'Cardiff' the next question would be how did you get through the barriers. It would soon become apparent the journey started from London.

So what benefit has come from this prosecution?
I am struggling to think of any benefit to any party.

No benefit to society but it deters people from travelling by train, which is what people who are anti rail travel want.

Some people - whose mindset is very different to an average person who can apply common sense - are very happy with this. And nothing we can say will make them see sense.

 

[6Gman]

So what benefit has come from this prosecution?
I am struggling to think of any benefit to any party.

Well, he'll know in future to book a ticket through to where he's travelling or to sort it out before getting on the second train.
He'll also know that - if you've got a potential prosecution hanging over you - you need to advise the other party of any change of address.

ATW might (though I suspect won't) have learnt to screen potential prosecutions more carefully.

 

[Puffing Devil]

No benefit to society but it deters people from travelling by train, which is what people who are anti rail travel want.

Some people - whose mindset is very different to an average person who can apply common sense - are very happy with this. And nothing we can say will make them see sense.

In this case there probably is little benefit, and it should not have gone to court. If the passenger had picked up his mail and engaged with ATW from the start of the process the end point of a summons and non-attendance resulting in the usual fine would not have happened.

It's unfortunate, but I do not blame ATW for letting this run through - from their side this is a fare evader failing to engage. The ultimate end to this process is court.

I also take exception to the headline fine: As many on the forum know, a Statutory Declaration will see this rolled back with a new court appearance. Given the circumstances, I doubt that ATW would pursue this if the passenger engaged before the new hearing. Should the matter actually end up in court, I would expect that a very strong case for an Absolute Discharge to be made.

 

[yorkie]

ATW might (though I suspect won't) have learnt to screen potential prosecutions more carefully.

Not just unlikely! No chance!

ATW and their apologists won't think that way. In fact Bethan Jelf confirmed that senior managers review all these cases. Her statement is defiant; they aren't going to listen to reason.

TOCs like ATW don't have to worry about reputation; most of their users have no viable alternative. It's not like any other industry where customers who have paid the right amount would be respected and potential customers have to be earnt.

They are very happy at this and they don't care one bit what most ordinary people who are capable of applying common sense will think of the company.

And if some people are deterred from travelling with them, they won't care. Overcrowding is an issue at peak times, a hefty subsidy is guaranteed. It's not their problem. There is no incentive for them to get a good reputation with the travelling public.

 

[Tetchytyke]

So what benefit has come from this prosecution?
I am struggling to think of any benefit to any party.

ATW profit and the bailiff enforcing the debt gets £310 for attempting enforcement.

The fat cat bosses and the morally bankrupt bailiffs are quids in!

 

[farleigh]

ATW profit and the bailiff enforcing the debt gets £310 for attempting enforcement.

The fat cat bosses and the morally bankrupt bailiffs are quids in!

Life affirming isn't it?

 

[Puffing Devil]

All completely avoidable if the passenger had engaged with ATW after the "stop".

ATW profit and the bailiff enforcing the debt gets £310 for attempting enforcement.

The fat cat bosses and the morally bankrupt bailiffs are quids in!

Life affirming isn't it?

 

[gareth950]

Not just unlikely! No chance!

ATW and their apologists won't think that way. In fact Bethan Jelf confirmed that senior managers review all these cases. Her statement is defiant; they aren't going to listen to reason.

TOCs like ATW don't have to worry about reputation; most of their users have no viable alternative. It's not like any other industry where customers who have paid the right amount would be respected and potential customers have to be earnt.

They are very happy at this and they don't care one bit what most ordinary people who are capable of applying common sense will think of the company.

And if some people are deterred from travelling with them, they won't care. Overcrowding is an issue at peak times, a hefty subsidy is guaranteed. It's not their problem. There is no incentive for them to get a good reputation with the travelling public.

Plus ATW are walking away from the franchise in October (unless they get an extension which won't be popular with anyone) so they really don't care about reputation at this point.
They've even recently just threatened the owner of a Facebook page called 'Arriva Trains Fails' with legal action, as his doctored logo, that has replaced 'Wales' with 'Fails' is what appears as ATW's official logo when you Google search for Arriva Trains Wales!

 

[Antman]

All completely avoidable if the passenger had engaged with ATW after the "stop".

The passenger moved address, it would all be completely avoidable if ATW had used a molecule of common sense to start with.

 

[yorksrob]

Whether the passenger moved address or not is neither here nor there, the case should never have been brought in the first place.

 

[father_jack]

Or obtained a zero-fare overdistance excess, which some staff go to great lengths to avoid issuing.

Have we confirmed if it was a return portion he was using (I'm assume it was as evening is mentioned and the price fits a return) but we end at the old unanswered question- what is the "destination" on a ticket ? An excess involves over-riding beyond the destination, blah blah blah. A CDF-PAD ticket has a destination of PAD, CDF is the origin so was an excess applicable ?

*BTW until a "ticket knowledgeable" manager tells me to stop (and they haven't in 15 years !) I would have issued an excess on the return portion.

But in my opinion the pax felt they had spent enough and isn't the Valleys free/"pay when challenged" if you're right side of the barriers at CDF anyway

 

[Parallel]

Plus ATW are walking away from the franchise in October (unless they get an extension which won't be popular with anyone)

To be honest, the new franchise holder will not solve many problems initially, and will probably be just as unpopular - The current problem has been more within the logistics of the franchise, than the franchise holder themselves. Morally right or wrong, ATW are in a position to prosecute and the name 'Arriva' doesn't impact anything else really - Unlike Virgin where the name is branded elsewhere. I'm from GWR land and everyone I know who commutes dislikes them.

Personally, I think if he gets in touch and explains to them, they should drop it down considerably (if they still have the power to do so). The issue is that the letters haven't been answered and Arriva would naturally go to prosecution next. Has the passenger gone straight to the press before writing to the company? The issue will be if it's already gone through the court, that will complicate things and reduce the likelihood of anything being reduced.

 

[PaulHarding150]

The person walked past the excess fares window in the tunnel at Central and joined the train to Heath High Level

The excess fare window is now right at the back/south of the station. He wouldn’t have walked passed it to get to platforms 6/7

Well he dodged the fare between Cardiff General and Heath High Level.

Please call it Cardiff Central - the name it’s used since 1973.

What I and many others take umbrage at is prosecuting passengers for failing to get a zero-fare excess.

Do you think an ordinary passenger will know what a zero-fare excess ticket is?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Do you think an ordinary passenger will know what a zero-fare excess ticket is?

No, and that - along with the fact that they are often impossible to get - is exactly why I find it unacceptable to prosecute passengers who fail to get the appropriate excess. Taking them to civil Court is one thing - prosecuting them for failing to pay the additional £0 is taking the proverbial.

To be fair, excesses are not a particularly complex topic as rail ticketing goes (at least, the basics of it aren't), but when most passengers don't even know what the difference between Anytime, Off-Peak and Advance is, I'm not surprised the person who ended up being prosecuted didn't know of the need to get such an excess.

 

[bb21]

Since we are just going round in circles, thread locked.