I am so angry@ penalty fare

somersertboy

got a letter today from the IAS stating "thank you for your correspondence, a full written response will be issued as soon as possible"Please also note that in the meantime and whilst this case is pending it is not necessary to make further appeals/payments" "finally may I thank you for taking the time to write and i confirm that a reply will be issued as soon as possible"

independent appeals service.

I think they are 'investigating' now as they like to call it-probably running it by their solicitors to see if they think they can nail me or not.

Seems to me they are looking into it now -rather than first time around when they just say "we cant uphold your case" as a routine reply to see if you will cough up, which I suspect is what most of the g.public would do.=big revenue?

Anyway will update when I hear what's happening next.

Livingthedream

Thanx for the update, at least they've answered your 2nd appeal, I don't think you'll have to wait long to find out your fate, week at the most.

somersertboy wrote: »

I think they are 'investigating' now as they like to call it-probably running it by their solicitors to see if they think they can nail me or not.

To be honest 'the strict liability offence of 'Fail to show a valid ticket' contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.1 (2005)' they could possibly win in a court, however, would it be cost effective for them to take it to court, both financial and the effect of this reaching the papers as it would generate a lot of bad publicity for the train company and the IAS.

FARE-COP

Two important points need consideration here

1. An Unpaid Fare Notice is NOT a civil debt. This is why it can result in a prosecution in a Magistrates Court for the alleged Byelaw offence of 'fail to show a valid ticket on demand'

2. The independent penalty fares appeal service have no authority or remit to ajudicate on Unpaid Fare Notices. Their activities are confined to Penalty Fares maters. This case is NOT PENALTY FARE matter

.

jkdd77

FARE-COP wrote: »

Two important points need consideration here

1. An Unpaid Fare Notice is NOT a civil debt. This is why it can result in a prosecution in a Magistrates Court for the alleged Byelaw offence of 'fail to show a valid ticket on demand'

2. The independent penalty fares appeal service have no authority or remit to ajudicate on Unpaid Fare Notices. Their activities are confined to Penalty Fares maters. This case is NOT PENALTY FARE matter

.

I thought a TOC can choose to pursue an unpaid fare as either a criminal offence in the magistrate courts (much more likely), or in the county courts as a civil debt (less likely), at their absolute discretion?

newfoundglory

Hmmm, personally i'm sceptical of it being anything but a civil debt. The National Rail Conditions of Carriage and TOC Terms and Conditions are only CONTRACTS... they are NOT LAWS passed by parliament.

In fact, the National Rail CoC say they can be updated at any time and discretion and that you are bound by the updated CoC whatever those may be... which must itself be an unfair contractual term... so you could argue that some of the Conditions of Carriage are unenforceable by any court.

I agree that you could still be nailed for 'failing to show a valid ticket on demand'... but this has NOTHING to do with the civil debt of the money which may or may not be owed (remember, you have actually paid for the journey you made already). I guess its a bit like civil recovery for shoplifting if you like....

Its not for a train operating company to say legally what you owe (if anything), that is for the court to decide.

I'd say let them try and chase the unpaid fare notice, you already have the evidence that you HAVE PAID the fare in advance. You also have several letters which make the government-subsidised train companies involved look incompetent, unreasonable and stupid.

vp_99

On july 5th I travelled to manchester with a young persons ticket. I had purchased a 16-25 railcard on the 4th of july.

sometime between collecting my ticket and boarding the train I lost my 16-25 railcard. When asked to produce it I was unable to do so and was issued with the unpaid fares notice. For £146 for one way, my original return ticket was for £43.

On the return journey, the same thing happened, and i received another unpaired fares notice for £146.

I am able to show the stamped receipt. As well as the purchase receipt. I showed the train manager my driving licence and he took down the number on the unpaid fare notice so I am able to prove that the receipts for the 16-25 railcard are mine.

I appealed the notices straight away, posted first class on the 6th of july. with copies of the 16-25 railcard stamped leaflet stub/receipt and purchase receipt. As well as copies of the unpaid fare notices and and tickets. To the revenue protection support services.

I have received no response to this. On the 29th of July I received instead 2 demands for £146 each. With 14 days to pay it from the 27th of July (the date quoted on the letter) before a further £20 is added to each fine.

I understand there is a need to prevent fare evasion. But I believe it is clear that this was not what I was doing, and that I am able to prove this. I feel the fine is unfair as I was the victim of honest misfortune rather than someone trying to defraud the system, and am able to prove this.

I don't plan to pay the fine either and am planning to fight it too. It would be interesting to see how your case pans out, and any tips you could give me or vice versa would be much appreciated.

thanks

vp_99

p.s. have posted my own thread: unpaid fare notice, dropped young persons card, can prove I have one.

If anyone wants to reply to that.

thanks

Livingthedream

vp_99, two different cases, the OP of this thread got an unpaid fare notice due to the railway's automated ticket systems letting him down, you got an unpaid fare notice due to your own misfortune, but this wasn't down to any fault of the railways.

FARE-COP

newfoundglory wrote: »

Hmmm, personally i'm sceptical of it being anything but a civil debt. The National Rail Conditions of Carriage and TOC Terms and Conditions are only CONTRACTS... they are NOT LAWS passed by parliament.

In fact, the National Rail CoC say they can be updated at any time and discretion and that you are bound by the updated CoC whatever those may be... which must itself be an unfair contractual term... so you could argue that some of the Conditions of Carriage are unenforceable by any court.

I agree that you could still be nailed for 'failing to show a valid ticket on demand'... but this has NOTHING to do with the civil debt of the money which may or may not be owed (remember, you have actually paid for the journey you made already). I guess its a bit like civil recovery for shoplifting if you like....

Its not for a train operating company to say legally what you owe (if anything), that is for the court to decide.

I'd say let them try and chase the unpaid fare notice, you already have the evidence that you HAVE PAID the fare in advance. You also have several letters which make the government-subsidised train companies involved look incompetent, unreasonable and stupid.

Yes jkdd77, the TOC can choose to go via the County Court for a Penalty Fare, but never do for the simple reason that they have to pay the charge upfront to issue the Summons by that route.

newfoundglory, I do have over 30 years experience in this very area of railways revenue protection & prosecution and I can assure you that the standard practice is to go the the issue of a Summons to be listed before a Magistrates Court for either the strict liability Byelaw offence (the Byelaws are made under S 219 of The Transport Act) or, the offence of intent to avoid a fare contrary to S.5 of The Regulation of Railways Act (1889). These are of course, Acts of Parliament.

In practice, the most common charge is that of 'fail to show a valid ticket on demand', that being the specific requirement as defined by Byelaw 18.1. (It's a bit like the offence of 'fail to display' in relation to a vehicle excise licence, you may have one, but the requirement is to display it and if you don't you can be charged with that failure.)

In each case the allegation of the amount of the unpaid rail fare is the single fare for the journey that should have been paid before travelling. In the case of a Penalty Fare, the penalty fare notice is cancelled and the Penalty Fares (Railways) Rules, as defined by The Railways Act, specifically allow for this.

Well over 5000 such summary cases are listed annually across the rail network.

I don't say that (in my personal opinion) it is always morally right for the TOC to proceed, but the law does permit it and in the case of the strict liability matter of the Byelaw offence, the vast majority of Summonses are successful. It is extremely rare for the Court to consider this an abuse of process and in all my time in this role, I have never had personal experience of that reaction, nor have I seen more than a handful of acquittals.

The TOCs do not proceed unless they are pretty certain they will succeed because of the costs involved for them.


.

anewman

Now the railways are all privatised and for profit, and with the massive price gap from the cheapest to a standard on the day ticket, I suggest the railway laws are severely out-dated and in need of revision. A law that makes a company a profit as a result of the commission of crime seems rather dodgy to me. My understanding is there are some sort of laws against profiting from crime.