P Binnersley
Member
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 440
Presuming the case was in Manchester magistrates, it is possible to ask at the court for the outcome of the case or find it on some court database?
The problem is that, even if the OP's ticket was valid according to the conditions of travel, who do you think the magistrate is going to believe, when faced with a train company that says it wasn't?
Testimony of a railway company official stating that the ticket was not valid is evidence.Courts don't work like that, they work on evidence
And if that evidence is given when known to be false, at risk of prejury.Testimony of a railway company official stating that the ticket was not valid is evidence.
You have a touching faith in the court system.Courts don't work like that, they work on evidence. The TOC would not be able to provide evidence of the ticket combination (remember, two tickets were involved for one journey) being invalid, because it was valid. Because they want to prosecute a criminal offence, the TOC need to provide evidence that the law was broken "beyond reasonable doubt", which they will be unable to do.
If it was in the Magistrates court, then no it wouldn't be.In effect case law
Shocking - well done for pursuing it.I had a similar instance a few years ago when I travelling Liverpool to Plymouth on a Saturday evening on split advance tickets Liverpool-Wolverhampton-Cheltenham-Bristol-Exeter-Plymouth splits. Was the second last service of evening we missed due to a 33 minute delay from Liverpool, so we ended up on the Final Birmingham to Plymouth service of the evening. The XC train manager immediately said "not vald" before he had even listened fully to what I had to say or had even looked at the tickets etc. As I had my daughter with me and didn't want a full on argument with the TM I just paid him the full price he demanded which was £157.
I genuinely thought this would be resolved with XC pretty quickly, but I was wrong and their stance was I should have accepted an unpaid fare noticed and appealed it instead of paying the fare. I wrote one last letter to XC asking for a refund or that I'll be taking out an online CC moneyclaim against them. Predictably they ignored the letter so I had little choice in taking them to court. Their only defence was a letter sent to the court and myself asking the court to side with them as I was deliberately fare dodging, which the judge quite rightly threw straight out and awarded me a judgment against them for the original £157 plus costs totalling another £104.
Even then it wasn't straight forward in reclaiming my money. They initially ignored the judgment and it was only on tem being sent draught papers of enforcement that they responded saying their accounts team will be forwarding payment within 14 days. They deliberately (I think) spelt my name incorrectly on the cheque to further delay things.
Just to show how other TOCs behave. A similar occurred with Southeastern when I had a £6 advance single Aylesham to Victoria with the intention of catching the 2345 Sleeper Paddington to Plymouth on an advance ticket also, but booked completely separate. The service from Aylesham was cancelled and the next extremely delayed due to a fatality and eventually arrived at Victoria just after midnight. Southeastern couldn't have been anymore appologetic and offered me either a hotel for the night plus a new ticket for tomorrow or a taxi all the way home. They couldn't source a taxi all the way so put me in a taxi to Paddington and a room at the Mecure hotel just outside the station.
As a general rule now, I don't book multiple combinations of advance ticket splits, generally restricteding it to one connection only and then normally allowing two hours in between
Don't let XC bully you.
Yeah, case laws can only be made in High Court or above (including High Courts from other Common Law applicable countries)If it was in the Magistrates court, then no it wouldn't be.
It only becomes case law if the case is heard by a higher court. Magistrates don't make case law so the losing side in the case would have to appeal to an appellate court in this case I believe that would be a Crown Court but they also don't make case law so someone would need to appeal it again this time, I believe, to the Court of Appeal and they, finally, would be able to make a decision which would constitute case law. A decision by one of the lower courts could be "persuasive" (i.e. you could argue that a magistrates court heard a case with the same or very similar facts and ruled on that in a certain way) in another case at the same level but that is absolutely not binding (so the court would be perfectly entitled to ignore what happened in a previous case).Yes I thought this had the potential to be a pivotal ruling. In effect case law.
It depends whom you appeal to – there are no fewer than five ways to "appeal" (in the common sense of the word) a Magistrates Court decision to convict.
Decisions of the Crown Court do not set a precedent but the High Court and Court of Appeal can.
- Probably the most common is to appeal to the Crown Court, which rehears the case. An appeal from the Crown Court can go either to the High Court (by case stated) or the Court of Appeal, with that court's leave.
- It is possible to make a section 142 application for the case to be heard again by different magistrates or a different district judge because it is in the interests
- For an appeal on a matter of law only, you may apply for a "case stated" which goes to the High Court. A case stated cannot look to disturb findings of fact such as the reliability of witnesses. Both prosecution and defence can apply for a case stated. Leave of the magistrates is required to state a case, and they may refuse leave if they consider the application to be frivolous.
- It is also possible to apply to the High Court for a judicial review of the magistrates' decision, if you consider they acted beyond their powers.
- Finally, a conviction can (at least in theory) be referred to the Criminal Cases Review Commission which can refer a matter back to court if all other avenues are closed, but I can't see them taking on a train ticketing matter.
As ainsworth74 suggests, it can take a long time and a lot of money to get to a precedent-setting court, and at any point the TOC involved could decide to drop the matter and the court will not rule.
Sorry for the delay. I attended court and this was just to hear my plea. However thr magistrate wanted to hear some of the outlining evidence. Something strange occured, the prosecution used section 9.4 as THEIR evidence. I was baffled, I explained that 9.4 forms the bases of why I was able to be on the next train.Some posts moved to: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-where-a-through-ticket-was-available.209907/
@Mickyb please contact us (by using the report button on this post) when you are able to update us with the outcome.
UPDATE: thread now unlocked
TIL admit they got it wrong? That'd be funny. I'm honestly more surprised they gave up.I think they should send an apology for putting you through all this uneccesarily.
well done, and thanks for coming back to update. They really should apologise and compensate you for the hassle you have had here. I guess worth pressing the train company customer services for that, tho I could understand why you might want no more to do with them!Sorry for the delay. I attended court and this was just to hear my plea. However thr magistrate wanted to hear some of the outlining evidence. Something strange occured, the prosecution used section 9.4 as THEIR evidence. I was baffled, I explained that 9.4 forms the bases of why I was able to be on the next train.
The prosecution quickly advised that I only said my connecting train was delayed, and no evidence was provided to that effect. It had been! I didnt have a copy on me so the judge advised the prosecution to contact me directly to get this information but also for them to prove otherwise. A court case of Jan 7th 2021 was set.
I was then contacted by email by the prosecutor, who asked if I should now plead guilty as he couldnt find any evidence my train was delayed. Then he got my delay repay compensation docs from Northern Rail. After 3 weeks they have closed the case! I win! I BLOODY WIN!
Yes, congrats to the OP.TIL admit they got it wrong? That'd be funny. I'm honestly more surprised they gave up.
But in any event congratulations @Mickyb on getting the right outcome! Whilst I doubt it will achieve anything substantive you may wish to consider writing to CrossCountry to le them know that a company acting in their name got things this wrong.
All sounds like a very mickey mouse prosecution job to me.
The prosecution really should not be able to get away with coming out with outright lies in court.The prosecution quickly advised that I only said my connecting train was delayed, and no evidence was provided to that effect. It had been!
Quite. If TIL and XC pursue flimsy/false prosecutions like this and (nominally) 8/10 end in failure but 2/10 end in customers settling out of court, then it's good business sense that they continue like this, right?Well done Mickey!
But what are the repercussions for TIL and XC? None that I can see...
This forum is the life line of one person against the rail corporates.
It is irrelevant to the case in front of the magistrate at that time. What should or shouldn't have happened in other cases is irrelevant unless someone appealed a conviction and eventually it made it to a higher court where a precedent might have been established. Otherwise the magistrate is concerned with the law and facts of the case in front of them. As stated by @furlong earlier the people who should be doing something about cases like this are the DfT and ORR in their various regulatory roles. However, as I said at the time, they clearly don't care.