National Express threatening court action Help!!

robt_2

silkyuk9 wrote: »

Let me just ask you one question, and hopefully you will answer it.

If you bought an item from a shop and lost the receipt would you ever take it back for a refund or an exchange knowing that you had to produce the receipt?

its just something simple.

If it was faulty yes, proof or purchase does not have to be a receipt.

No idea what you are trying to prove.

Neil_B

Voyager2002 wrote: »

To answer the practical question, pay the money. Otherwise, you WILL be taken to court (it is a criminal matter, not a civil one, so there is no question of passing it over to debt collectors).

i take it that was aimed at my post - so maybe should clarify.

From the website of one of the organisations that acts as an independent appeals service for several train Cos (not this one in that area though - I think?)

IRCAS - google it.

"If you do not pay the outstanding balance in full, then the transport operator may decide to take further action to pursue the debt. the possible courses of action include the use of a debt collection agency, and a prosecution in the criminal courts."

With some relevance to what i said about them waiting until there was a worthwhile sum to claim - they also mention that costs will be added every time they write to you or take further action.
-

silkyuk9

robt wrote: »

If it was faulty yes, proof or purchase does not have to be a receipt.

No idea what you are trying to prove.

ok, what if the shop wanted proof that you bought it, something along the lines of a credit card for instance to show you where actually you.

moonrakerz

silkyuk9 wrote: »

don't you ever talk about my children as if they are unruly or do not follow rules.

Actually while you sleep at night my son is fighting for your freedom, so please do not tell me what is right or wrong!

1. I didn't accuse your children of being "unruly or do not follow rules"; I certainly intimated that you seem to think that they were exempt from the Rail company's Ts & Cs. If you can't actually read what I wrote ..............................

2. And don't try and pull heart strings - I spent 23 years defending you - and it saddens me that it seems to be have been a waste of time in your case !

3. I am trying to tell you right from wrong, your daughter made a mistake, instead of telling her that she WAS in the wrong and to accept it, you try and persuade her and others on this site that she should be made an exception and "let off".

4. "I left my railcard at home" is probably as common as "my dog ate my homework".

anewman

Unfortunately I have to agree with moonrakerz. You made an agreement and agreed to the terms and conditions of the railcard which say to show it with the ticket. At the end of the day it's a simple mistake anyone could make, like realising you left your passport at home while checking in for your flight to go on holiday. If you can't get the passport, you can't go. A bit more devastating than being asked to pay £17.50.

Ok the letters National Express sent might not be nice in threatening court action when it was a genuine error - but they also have to deal with those who think they can get away with buying a young persons railcard ticket when they don't have one.

Neil_Peters

I hardly think they would take you to court over £17.50, but as many others have said, it is stated in the terms and conditions. It is annoying, when I was younger I had a child ticket and I was pulled up on a train and I think they demanded the same amount roughly, they took my name and details but never recieved a letter or anything.

Guess sometimes its down to luck whether the driver will let it slide, unfortunatly on your occasion he didn't, all in all, I'd pay the £17.50 before it gets passed to a debt collection agency and they start adding their fee's to it.

orangemonkey

It has happened to me before. Bought my ticket, left my house in a rush, forgot my railcard. Ticket got check and I didnt have a valid ticket because I didnt have a railcard, so I had to buy a full price ticket all over again.

Second time it happened while I was travelling. I lost my railcard while on my trip. Went to the hotel, applied for a new replacement, printed out the replacement card order form together with e expiry date. Got checked, showed evidence including date that I reordered e card, Still had to pay full fare because I didnt have a valid card with me, so I didnt have a valid ticket.

Point being, even if you have the card and its checkable on the system, if you dont have it with you, u cant travel. So my advice, face up to it, she DID travel without a valid card ON her. So pay the 17.50 and do yourself with alot less trouble. I would think even if you brought it to court etc, its a waste of your own time and potentially money.

sarah_elton

bargepole wrote: »

There is one thing you can do about it - stop using these train companies and their ridiculous fare structure / idiotic conditions of carriage, and maybe they'll stop being so arrogant and realise that without paying passengers, they don't have a business.

Come to think of it, I really don't know why anyone uses public transport at all, you always get there quicker and in more comfort by car, as Jeremy Clarkson and the team prove every week on Top Gear!

No, I can't stop using them.

I live in north Essex and commute into the City. I could drive or take the coach I suppose, but in rush hour that would take at least twice as long. It would probably mean spending about an extra 2 hours a day travelling.... No thanks!

In addition, my season ticket works out at £13 per work day. Something tells me that petrol on a 90 mile round trip plus all day City of London parking would be considerably more. Oh yeah... And congestion charge.

As for comfort, well the trains are air conditioned, I always get a seat and I sit and read the paper... Less comfortable than rush hour driving? Not for me...

omelette451

They want the money, we have been told that regardless of were the card is if she cannot provide it on the train when requested then she is travelling on an invalid ticket.

It actually says on the back of the railcard (and in the terms and condtions she signed when getting it) that the railcard MUST be carried and presented with the ticket bought using it. Any such ticket not accompanied by a railcard is deemed invalid.

It may technically be possible to prove that she does have a railcard but if she didn't have it with her, a fact which you don't deny, she is in breach of the conditions of travel and the inspector was right to question it. Just because you don't like the rules, it doesn't give you permission to break them.

Can anyone help here or are we just flogging a dead horse and have to pay the £17-50.

Yes you do. And you should be thankful they're letting you get away with this much: the inspector seems to have been happy charging her a simple 'excess fare' (i.e. the difference between her ticket price and the non-railcard fare) rather than the £73 open single fare he is supposed to charge under the rules. So actually, rather than being inconsiderate jobsworths, the company is actually agreeing to lose out on revenue it is entitled to in order to give you a lower bill.

omelette451

Voyager2002 wrote: »

. As it is, Stagecoach have incurred considerable administration costs

Or indeed National Express...