Card charge without authorisation - help!

pqrdef

I remember when you wouldn't have been charged for an accidental journey. I'm a little shocked by the willingness of posters to tell you this charge is entirely fair and proper. It's a harsh world we live in now, and it's our own fault.

But once they've got your debit card number they can charge what they like to your account. You authorise them to charge you by handing over the card or sticking it in the machine. It's an illusion to think you have to "sign for" the money by giving a PIN, just as it's an illusion to think that any sum of money displayed has any significance. For instance, if you pay by debit card in a shop, they can decide after you've left the shop that you were undercharged for the goods, and adjust accordingly.

They check your PIN to make it harder for you to dispute the transaction. If you were to claim that you weren't there, the bank and the train company would be in a weaker position because of the lack of PIN. So long as you don't claim that, nobody cares about the PIN.

boxrick

This is my partner who posted on here, I told her to write this after the events which happened.

I also thought it odd that he could return with a "credit note", why would he need to give her credit when she was paying? Seems bizarre to me, but his words were something along the lines of "I will return with a credit note to take payment". I presume she will respond with his exact words.

We are not randomly in the position to pay £145.. It is not the sort of money we can randomly spare and leave "unplanned" for.

Thanks for the advice, I think the best course of action is to contact the bank and try and get the payment refused. Then also contact the train line and at least only pay the difference. The most expensive pre booked ticket I can find is £120, so £145 for a "late" ticket ( ie on the train ) we should at best only been made to pay the difference and being extra charged for the sake of 20 minutes difference is bad enough let alone double charged! The worst part of it is we drive reasonably fuel efficient cars and could have got to London and back about 4 or 5 times on £200

Lou_Lou_Donut

Getting the payment refused with your bank will still leave you liable to pay the train company, unless you can prove the conductor was somehow at fault...

Speaking as someone who works in the rail industry (though not in ticketing)
Terms and conditions are quite clear for advance tickets, that travel on the incorrect train will require you to purchase a completely new ticket as if one wasn't held. It's a bit ambiguous if you should have been charged for a single or return, though as advance tickets are only sold as singles then it should have just been a single ticket that you were charged on the train for.

The conductor would be unable to issue a credit note, merely refund the transaction on his ticket machine. To obtain anything else you would need to deal with the train company concerned.

As a previous poster has asked, if you provide full details of the train on which you were booked and and the train you actually caught, then we might be able to advise of what the correct fare for the journey undertaken was. THEN you may have a case with the train company...

Plxply

boxrick wrote: »

The most expensive pre booked ticket I can find is £120, so £145 for a "late" ticket ( ie on the train ) we should at best only been made to pay the difference and being extra charged for the sake of 20 minutes difference is bad enough let alone double charged!

Although it's unfair the ticket you then bought wasn't pre-booked, it was in fact a "late payment" and I wouldn't be surprised if they purposefully have a section about this in their terms and conditions for the addition of an admin fee.

simongregson

Personally, I would just leave it, the authorisation will probably drop off your account... You might well get away without paying the extortionate penalty fare.

the worst that could happen is they will contact you and you will have to pay the excess fare. But that is quite unlikely as they have not actually sustained an actual loss.

Migster

simongregson wrote: »

the worst that could happen is they will contact you and you will have to pay the excess fare. But that is quite unlikely as they have not actually sustained an actual loss.

Actually the worst thing that could happen is that the train company decide to prosecute for the offence.

pqrdef

Migster wrote: »

Actually the worst thing that could happen is that the train company decide to prosecute for the offence.

I think you have to do something bad before they can prosecute for an offence.

inmypocketnottheirs

Migster wrote: »

Actually the worst thing that could happen is that the train company decide to prosecute for the offence.

Putting the rights and wrongs to one side for a minute and looking at the practicalities, do the train company have the OP's name and address? If not, how are they going to take action?

bengal-stripe

inmypocketnottheirs wrote: »

........looking at the practicalities, do the train company have the OP's name and address? If not, how are they going to take action?

OP bought the previous tickets on-line, quite possibly using the same card.

JuicyJesus

Funkyfreddy wrote: »

If the train journey you were on had a walk on fare of £145 but you had already paid £68 for an alternative service I would have thought that you would therefore have had to pay £77

Why should you get to offset the cost of a ticket on one train against the price of an entirely different train to an entirely different place?

The answer is, you don't. Same way you don't get to buy a cheap tin of beans from Tesco and then get to upgrade to Heinz, keeping the cheap tin, if you just pay the difference in price.