Why is it illegal to sell rail tickets?

[leerail]

Just wondering why it is not legal to sell / transfer train tickets?

It says:-
Any person found to be transfering a rail ticket is liable for Prosecution as all Tickets remain the property of the railways and sold subject to the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.

Prosecution for these offences may also be undertaken under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 and this carries a maximum fine in a magistrates court of £1000 and or three months in prison for each offence.


So if i bought a ticket which I'm not going to use and instead give it to a family member or friend to use then is this illegal too?

How do they check?

 

[37401]

Because NR and the TOCs dont make any money from someone re-selling a ticket, pluse ticket touts as they call them rob people blind

 

[Ticket Man]

Touts are the main reason, although mistakes are some time made in the ticket office, you are still most likely able to get what you want when you buy your tickets there.
Questioning one unfortunate customer of these touts who had purchased a Virgin travellers ticket thinking he was getting a cheap ride in first class, he was not best pleased on being informed that the ticket he had paid £50 for was about as likely to get him to Manchester as strapping on a pair of roller blades and passing wind very quickly.
Safe to say, buying from anyone other than a ticket office would result in the public complaining why the tocs allow people to re-sell tickets.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
in regards to passing tickets between family, as long as the new bearer of the ticket is eligible to hold that ticket (e.g. not someone in their mid thirties holding a senior railcard ticket) then providing its not used I wouldn't even notice. Even if I did there wouldn't be any point in pursuing the matter as all accusations would have no evidence to back them up.
I'd look real smart in court saying "well judge they told me that they got the valid ticket from their sister". My P45 would probably make it home before I did.

 

[Old Timer]

Just wondering why it is not legal to sell / transfer train tickets?

To understand you need to go back to the introduction of the Railways and the very particular way that they provided a service.

Historically you apid the stagecoach when you got on board for the journey you were doing. All very well and good but not particularly sensible when applied to a railway.

This brings us to the Law of Contract.

Legally a Contract requires property (goods - something physical and tangible) to pass from one party to the other when money is exchanged.

In the case of a Railway there is nothing tangible. In addition the Law of Contract was based upon barter. A seller offers to seell and a buyer offers to buy at an agreed price. The agreement can only be made between the seller and the buyer, and must be agreed at the time of sale.

A receipt is the evidence of the basis upon which the sale (Contract) was agreed. Upon transfer the item then becomes wholly within the ownership of the buyer. Not so the case with a Railway ticket.

It came to be therefore that a Railway ticket was described in Law as being the equivalent of an old bill of sale, with some very big doifferencies. These being that (a) there was no transfer of property/goods, etc. (b) the Railway Company was bound ONLY to provide the transportation of the person from origin to destination. The timetable did not and still does not constitute any part of a performable Contract. The only liability is that of taking the passenger from A to B, the time and the method is irelevant (c) a ticket confers no right to a seat (unlike a stagecoach), (d) the Railway Company retains responsibility for the well being (safety) of the passenger during the time that they are travelling. The ticket is the evidence that legally should be produced in Court to demonstrate that there is actually a Contract in existence between the passenger and the Railway Company. This also partly explains the reason for zero charge excess tickets.

In Law a Contract has to be offered and accepted unconditionally. Without this the Contract is unenforceable. To discharge this, the Law had it, that the person buying the ticket must be the one using it, otherwise there could be no unconditional agreement between the parties.

Now obviously much has changed and it is now accepted that a person may buy a tiucket on behalf of someone else (and in effect be their agent). This right does not transfer to someone who buys and then sells the ticket to a third party. In Law there is no contract, because the ticket is the evidence of a Contract between the Railway and the PERSON to whom it was sold (or their agent) - who accepts the terms and conditions when they take the ticket from the booking clerk.

I appreciate all this is rather academic in many ways but I hope it explains WHERE tickets have come from and why there are still what appear to be strange rules. What I have written above is a very simplified explanation and needs to be treated in that regard.

 

[Oliver]

Just wondering why it is not legal to sell / transfer train tickets?

I think the main reason these days is revenue protection; many return tickets cost only slightly more than the single ticket price for the same route. So if I wanted to go from A to B and I found someone who wanted to go from B to A we could get together and buy one return instead of two singles and split the cost. In practice that's not likely to happen unless there was some kind of reselling system, and the law is there to prohibit such a business emerging.

Similarly, at places like the exit to Kings Cross underground you'll find low-life asking you for TravelCards for which you may have no further need. If you give them your ticket they can use it, or sell it to other low-life.

As far as I know, there is never any objection to someone deliberately buying a ticket for someone else; if I were to buy a ticket for my mother-in-law to visit me and the reservation was in my name, not hers, she's unlikely to be thrown off the train. (No further comment....)

 

[Oswyntail]

I would suggest that this is another area where a little bit of clarification for the general public is required (though way down the priority list). For all the historical reasons so well elucidated earlier, effectively it is illegal to purchase a ticket on behalf of someone else - though it would take a jobsworth with gold bar three times over to enforce that. Except, of course, this is enforced when a railcard is in use. As a general principal, a regulation that is unenforceable is a bad regulation and should be thought out again. To me it has the feel of an age before mass rail travel.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

I would suggest that this is another area where a little bit of clarification for the general public is required (though way down the priority list). For all the historical reasons so well elucidated earlier, effectively it is illegal to purchase a ticket on behalf of someone else - though it would take a jobsworth with gold bar three times over to enforce that. Except, of course, this is enforced when a railcard is in use. As a general principal, a regulation that is unenforceable is a bad regulation and should be thought out again. To me it has the feel of an age before mass rail travel.

Clearly untrue.
That would mean that it was only legal to buy a ticket for yourself!
Family Railcards are therefore encouraging people to break the law?

 

[Greenback]

It is not illegal to buy a ticket for someone else. The railway has arrangements that allow this - SILK's!

 

[Oswyntail]

Just to clarify: according to the published regulation (see post 1) a ticket cannot be transferred legally; if i purchase a ticket, then I have set a contract between myself and the provider, with no opportunity at that stage to assign the contract to another party; therefore, if I buy a ticket on behalf of someone else (who may even be only standing next to me) I cannot transfer the ticket (and contract) to them. [SILKs are irrelevant, really, as they are for remote purchase.] Now we all know what the regulation was intended to mean, but, taken literally it doesn't. And the law, at the very least, should be designed to be taken literally. So this regulation is unsuitable and unworkable as it stands (not unique there :roll. I am sure that better legal minds than mine could come up with a regulation that is accurate - or even come to the conclusion that the regulation is not needed.

 

[brompton rail]

Interesting comments.
However South Yorkshire PTE sell Travelmaster tickets (Valid on all buses, trams and trains) that are available for a Day / Week / Month etc. These tickets are scratchcards and do not currently require a photocard and are intended to be shared with others, should the purchaser wish. These are to change in a week or so to become 1 Day / 7 Day and 28 Day products but will still be scratchcards. The Annual Travelmaster (currently you are given 12 x monthly scratchcard) will become an ITSO type card with a photo within the card (similar to English National Concessionary Bus Pass).

Reading earlier remarks it might be argued that these tickets are illegal!

 

[Old Timer]

It is now permitted for a person to purchase a national railway ticket on behalf of another person, by acting as their agent. The law deems that the agent's acceptance of the terms the conditions is binding on behalf of the person for whom they are acting.

 

[Greenback]

Just to clarify: according to the published regulation (see post 1) a ticket cannot be transferred legally; if i purchase a ticket, then I have set a contract between myself and the provider, with no opportunity at that stage to assign the contract to another party; therefore, if I buy a ticket on behalf of someone else (who may even be only standing next to me) I cannot transfer the ticket (and contract) to them. [SILKs are irrelevant, really, as they are for remote purchase.] Now we all know what the regulation was intended to mean, but, taken literally it doesn't. And the law, at the very least, should be designed to be taken literally. So this regulation is unsuitable and unworkable as it stands (not unique there :roll. I am sure that better legal minds than mine could come up with a regulation that is accurate - or even come to the conclusion that the regulation is not needed.

As you say, many laws are unworkable and unenforceable. They need to exist as a way of fidning something to charge persistent offenders with, as with the passing of travelcards once the person has finished with it. This did happen to me when Iw as young, and a nice lady gave me her ODTC when I arrived in London. I hasten to add I had no idea that this was wrong! Of course, this deprived London of the money I would have paid for my own travelcard. Not a great amount, but suppose that the lady was doing this every day, and was only one of quite a few people doing it all over the capital, then the money soon starts to mount up. Also, suppose she was charging a pound or so? Now I doubt the book would have ben thrown at her for a one off, but the regulation allows a mechanism by which some sort of action could be taken against persistent offenders.

The regulation is fine as it stands!

 

[transportphoto]

I would say (my personal opinion) is that someone can act as an agent for the passenger as long as they are not in any way profiting from it.

So if I set up a small corner shop near/on a rail station which is unmanned - I could offer a free service and go and buy tickets for future use from a official source. I would then tell the passenger exactly where I bought them etc...
Obviously charging them for the ticket.

(However the above is only a could and may not be commercially viable)

 

[tony_mac]

Unless you arrange exactly who you are buying tickets for, then that would not be acting as an agent.

There are a few anomalies though - scratch card tickets, like the Merseyside Saveaway should only be sold by an 'authorised person'. I very much doubt that every person working in a shop that sells them has been personally authorised.

They are also illegal as rail tickets because they don't have the price on them.

 

[transportphoto]

Ok Extending on My Previous Post.

The Person could fill in a 'form' stating who will be using the tickets - what their request is etc.
Therefore I would have arranged EXACTLY who I would be buying tickets for.

 

[Greenback]

Unless you arrange exactly who you are buying tickets for, then that would not be acting as an agent.

There are a few anomalies though - scratch card tickets, like the Merseyside Saveaway should only be sold by an 'authorised person'. I very much doubt that every person working in a shop that sells them has been personally authorised.

They are also illegal as rail tickets because they don't have the price on them.

Presumably the shop or shop owner is the authorised agent rather than any individual staff? A bit like a Post Office run by a sub postmaster? Or a pub?

Ok Extending on My Previous Post.

The Person could fill in a 'form' stating who will be using the tickets - what their request is etc.
Therefore I would have arranged EXACTLY who I would be buying tickets for.

I don't see much of a market for this! I know its only a 'what if', but where wiould you make any money? At least as an authorised ticket agent you;d make whatever commission they give these days!

 

[transportphoto]

Presumably the shop or shop owner is the authorised agent rather than any individual staff? A bit like a Post Office run by a sub postmaster? Or a pub?

Shop as the Agent.

I don't see much of a market for this! I know its only a 'what if', but where wiould you make any money? At least as an authorised ticket agent you;d make whatever commission they give these days!

Very True = The Idea was only a 'what if' it could well be legal but it wouldn't be commercially viable.

 

[tony_mac]

Presumably the shop or shop owner is the authorised agent rather than any individual staff? A bit like a Post Office run by a sub postmaster? Or a pub?

I am being picky, but the byelaws say that it is the person that must be authorised.
I suppose it's quite possible the authorisation is for 'anybody who works at those premises.'

 

[trainfanatic]

Is it therefore illegal to buy/sell tickets on auction sites?

 

[transportphoto]

I presume so - yes.

 

[trainfanatic]

The reason for the query was that the well known auction site I'm thinking of used to ban the practice, but now doesn't. I'm mainly referring to the practice of selling a return half of a ticket as , for example, they got a lift back home from a work colleague. Another example is people selling tickets they no longer want due to a change in circumstances (like losing your job).

 

[Greenback]

I am being picky, but the byelaws say that it is the person that must be authorised.
I suppose it's quite possible the authorisation is for 'anybody who works at those premises.'

It was just a thought!

Is it therefore illegal to buy/sell tickets on auction sites?

I would say that it is illegal to do that!

The reason for the query was that the well known auction site I'm thinking of used to ban the practice, but now doesn't. I'm mainly referring to the practice of selling a return half of a ticket as , for example, they got a lift back home from a work colleague. Another example is people selling tickets they no longer want due to a change in circumstances (like losing your job).

I'm sur eit will be illegal if the tickets are still valid. I don;t see that it would be a problem if the tickets are out of date. If so, there must be a lot of 'criminal' collectors around!

 

[jon0844]

This forum does have good timing. Tonight, two people asked to keep their Travelcards when returning to Hatfield from London tonight, and then tried to sell them outside! Okay, not quite the same thing - but it's been ages since I've seen anyone try and do this.

They didn't find any takers and ended up walking off with them. Goodness knows why they were allowed to keep their tickets (as receipts perhaps?) in the first place. Unlike Potters Bar, you can't use the ticket again on local buses.

Technically, they could say they were going to pay for another Hatfield > Hadley Wood return to go back in later (the TC being valid until 0429) but I don't know how that works in practice.

 

[Dolive22]

I looked in to exactly what the legal position on this was, and I reached the conclusion that where they were transferred for fraudulent use one of or more of a sea of fraud related offences were comitted*, then found out that what TfL did was prosecute for theft as you are under a duty to return the ticket after use and by giving it away you commit theft*.

If you use the ticket you are travelling without a valid ticket and I would think the court would think you intened to evade the fare so they would convict of the more serious 1889 offence*.

OT, the law on contract requires consideration to pass both ways, which can be action, a service, not performing an action, transferring physical goods or a chose in action, or promising to do any of those. I am not aware of tickets being in any way related to bills of sale. My Contract law is a little rusty, but I think I'm right on this.

A return is sold for the use of one person both ways, so technically it is plain fare evasion to travel on the return half alone.

The main legal obstacle to the trade in tickets is byelaw 21 that provides (in part) that no person shall sell or buy any ticket or transfer or receive an unused or part used ticket intending for it to be used otherwise than in accordance with conditions. No offence is comitted where the sale is by an authorised person or ticket machine. If the ticket seller knows you are buying for someone else you are fully legal. The staff act on behalf of the railway (which acts as one entity for these purposes) and choose to sell you a ticket for someone else.

It's not strictly true that laws should be interpreted strictly. I'd be heppy to get in to the three different rules (which aren't actually rules) and two different systems for interpretation if you want to*.

I understand the law to mean that in strictness it is illegal to buy a ticket for someone else when the staff don't know you are buying for them, although in practice it is unlikely you will be prosecuted for buying a ticket that is valid for the person who uses it. The offences technically committed would be fare evasion* and numerous byelaw 21 and 22 offences, as well as byelaw 17/18 offences (which are arguably fare evasion).

If the staff know you are buying for someone else you are in the clear.

Authorised person means i) a person acting in the course of his duties who:
(a) is an employee or agent of an Operator, or
(b) any other person authorised by an Operator

plus coppers. An operator could authorise people generally, as they do for the management of some station car parks. It would also be possible for the shop staff to be agents of the operator.

*I can elaborate on anything starred if anyone is as sad as me and wants to know more.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just noticed the tony_mac bit about tickets without fares on them being illegal on the railway. I thought that until someone else on here pointed out I hadn't read the footnotes on the SLD and that requirement had been repealed.

 

[Old Timer]

Dolive21

OT, the law on contract requires consideration to pass both ways, which can be action, a service, not performing an action, transferring physical goods or a chose in action, or promising to do any of those. I am not aware of tickets being in any way related to bills of sale. My Contract law is a little rusty, but I think I'm right on this.

My point was that the ticket is evidence of the existence of the Contract (hence like a bill of sale). The Contract is fulfilled by money passing to the Railway Company and the passenger being conveyed hence consideration both ways.

My point being that the ticket is evidence of a contract between the Railway Company and the passenger.

The rest of your post goes some considerable way towards supporting some of the various points that I raised, and which were debated on here at excruciating length in the winter.

 

[Dolive22]

OT, I hope I haven't offended you. Most of your post was spot on, I've never been very good at positive/constructive/positive. You've actually got the legal position down better than some people I've been in a law class with.

 

[yorkie]

I looked in to exactly what the legal position on this was, and I reached the conclusion that where they were transferred for fraudulent use one of or more of a sea of fraud related offences were comitted*, then found out that what TfL did was prosecute for theft as you are under a duty to return the ticket after use and by giving it away you commit theft*..

Erm, no, not quite! It's not theft! But it could be fraud!

In practice what they do is absolutely nothing!

I reported the practice of someone asking for travelcards at King's Cross (they were then going to re-sell them) they were known to the staff and all they did was ask them not to. No action was taken.

The best thing to do, when the touts ask if you have finished with your travelcard, is say "yes" then rip it up in front of them I honestly did that once at King's Cross. In recent years I've not seen any touts there, probably because very few people would have finished with a paper Travelcard at that point these days.

If offered a Travelcard, you could take it off their hands and then walk off with it and rip it up. That may be slightly more risky though.

 

[Failed Unit]

I may have missed something in all the posts. I buy tickets online for my parents who have senior railcards. Noone here would have an issue with that. Would a ticket office sell me the ticket considering I look a little young for a senior railcard. I remember when I was younger a ticket office would sell me 2 returns with yp railcard when I had both cards without the card holder present.

 

[jon0844]

When people asked me at KGX if I'd finished with my ticket, I used to give everything from expired tickets to receipts.

However, I realised quite quickly that some people might have taken offence and done something nasty to me so I just started to ignore them. These people hang around the station all the time, so even if they didn't do anything there and then - they might just remember you another night when it's later and emptier.

 

[Dolive22]

I was surprised that it was theft but it is! By giving away the ticket you dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another (TfL in the case of a travelcard) intending to permanently deprive the other of the property.

You would also be committing byelaws offences and possibly supplying an article for use in a fraud as well as being an accessory to fraud and fare offences.

I can find try and find the case citations from the textbook if you want.