Train Fare Appeal Denied

wealdroam

peter50000 wrote: »

thanks for response, just a bit frustrated i spent the time appealing as advised when having evidence of paying the ticket doesnt seem to matter.

You were told that your appeal would be ok simply because the Penalty Fare issuer felt that that was the best thing to tell you... even if she didn't believe it.
It's just an easy way of avoiding confrontation and creates the impression that she is only doing their job but is really on your side.

yorkie2

Stigy wrote: »

Giving a false name and/or address isn't a Byelaw offence.....

It is; it would be a breach of Byelaw 23. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf but I note you go on to agree that this is the case later in your post

Stigy wrote: »

and in this scenario would be the more serious Regulation of Railways Act (RRA) offence. If one was to give a false name and address and for whatever reason there wasn't enough evidence to prove a ticket offence under the RRA (The two have to go hand in hand, and to be fair usually do, quite easily....why else would you supply incorrect details if not to avoid a fare?), then you could use Byelaw 23(1) which relates to refusing to give a name and/or address. It's often how one interprets the law in this case, as I guess refusal to give a correct name or address equates, much the same to refusing point blank.

Anyway, I digress.

Yeah, I did say that:

Giving a false name and address is, at the very least, a 'strict liability' byelaw offence and it could be seen as evidence of an attempt to avoid payment which is a more serious Regulation of Railways Act offence.

My point (which I now emphasise in bold above) was not to say that this is 'only' a Byelaw offence; but that it is - as a minimum - a Byelaw offence and could be seen as evidence that there was an attempt to avoid payment.

I'm guessing you misread my post earlier, which is fine, these things happen :D

We are both agreed on the importance of giving correct details to avoid escalating the matter, and I hope people reading this bear that in mind! If anyone thinks giving false details is a good idea, I am sure we can both find examples of why it isn't!

Stigy

yorkie2 wrote: »

It is; it would be a breach of Byelaw 23. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf but I note you go on to agree that this is the case later in your post

Yeah, I did say that:

Giving a false name and address is, at the very least, a 'strict liability' byelaw offence and it could be seen as evidence of an attempt to avoid payment which is a more serious Regulation of Railways Act offence.

My point (which I now emphasise in bold above) was not to say that this is 'only' a Byelaw offence; but that it is - as a minimum - a Byelaw offence and could be seen as evidence that there was an attempt to avoid payment.

I'm guessing you misread my post earlier, which is fine, these things happen :D

We are both agreed on the importance of giving correct details to avoid escalating the matter, and I hope people reading this bear that in mind! If anyone thinks giving false details is a good idea, I am sure we can both find examples of why it isn't!

Nope, didn't miss-read anything....maybe I didn't word it properly. I was just making the point that you can use byelaw 23 for false details, although there needs to be a certain amount of interpretation of the offence to make sense as it could be argued that it relates merely to one refusing to give any name or address, let alone their own . The difference in the RRA offence being that it specifically mentions false name/address rather than refusal.

I was just basically clarifying what you had already said, but making clear what could have been miss-construed. I knew what you meant of course, but often as you know, things get confused.

Sorry if all I've done is confuse matters...;)