Fixed penalty notice advice.

[toffeedanish]

Yes,I wanted to pay cash

For completeness, the correct course of action would have been to obtain a Promise to Pay from the TVM (having arrived in time to do so) to present at next opportunity to pay.

 

[6Gman]

A couple of rail staff members told me that my husband shouldn't shout at their staff, but when someone has been rude and abrupt to you, it's very difficult. The police officer we spoke to on our way out witnessed what happened, but nobody became involved. It wasn't a serious situation, my husband basically told the rail guy he was out of order, we wanted to buy tickets on the train, as we couldn't do so we were asking to purchase at our 1st opportunity. He told the rail guy he hopes karma will come back to him and his family, but he didn't threaten anybody at all.

I think any remaining sympathy for your husband's position may have expired at that point.

Abusing staff is bad enough, but bringing their families into it is bound to rile them.

 

[AlterEgo]

I worked in a call centre for years. If people swear, at the situation, ie "this is f@cking joke, or are you f@cking serious" then I didn't class that ad abusive. I was the "face" of the company and people were frustrated. If they swore directly at me, ie "listen you f@cking beatch", etc, then yes, I'd say that's abusive. Swearing and displaying frustration or anger, isn't abusive. He didn't abuse the staff member at any time. He didn't call him names or anything. So, yes, I don't think that's abuse. As a different person commented, behaviour which is classed as abusive is very different from each person's perspective.

I’m very sorry to read your time receiving abusive language in a call centre has made you unable to see what abuse actually is. I’m grateful my time in call centres didn’t make me quite so jaded!

I’m afraid you’re onto a loser here; wishing karma on someone and their family is right out and while I respect you feel bound to stick up for your partner I don’t think it’s wise to try and let a court decide whether your partner’s conduct breached the law.

 

[RPI]

He told the rail guy he hopes karma will come back to him and his family, but he didn't threaten anybody at all.

That is a threat, and is beyond a personal threat when the persons family is brought into it, thats the line crossed.

I would suggest that it could constitute an offence under the public order act, because all that requires is for the victim to have suffered "alarm or distress" and to convince a magistrate of this, there could be potential of a charge under the more serious breach of section 4 of the public order act, particularly if there was a genuine perceived threat to the employees family, though it would have to be passed to the Police in order to investigate and prosecute this through the CPS.

If there is bodycam footage or a second witness statement then Byelaw 6 prosecution would be pretty much be guaranteed to be successful in the magistrates.

 

[FrodshamJnct]

That is a threat, and is beyond a personal threat when the persons family is brought into it, thats the line crossed.

I would suggest that it could constitute an offence under the public order act, because all that requires is for the victim to have suffered "alarm or distress" and to convince a magistrate of this, there could be potential of a charge under the more serious breach of section 4 of the public order act, particularly if there was a genuine perceived threat to the employees family, though it would have to be passed to the Police in order to investigate and prosecute this through the CPS.

If there is bodycam footage or a second witness statement then Byelaw 6 prosecution would be pretty much be guaranteed to be successful in the magistrates.

Precisely. It (IMO) would be viewed very dimly by Magistrates. An explicit threat to the family as you’ve cited, however throwaway it was intended at the time, is an aggravating factor that has to be taken into account.

 

[WesternLancer]

A few months ago my husband and I travelled from Westhoughton to Manchester Victoria. The train pulled in as we arrived. We got on, bought a duo return ticket from the lady and enjoyed our day.

A few weeks later we did the exact same thing. Got on the train, intending to purchase a duo ticket, as its cheaper than buying 2 return fares. This time there was nobody on board to purchase the tickets from.

As soon as we arrived into Manchester we approached a member of staff and asked to purchase tickets. Immediately the guy said he was fining us. He was really rude and my husband was rude back to him. Several staff and police wandered over and eventually a different staff member advised that if I gave him our details he would file an incident report, but that we would NOT receive a fine. My husband made sure that this was recorded by the body cams, in case we were fined.

After receiving correspondence from National rail, I advised as above. I was asked to pay the fare amount and no further action taken.

However, my husband has been given a fixed penalty notice for £100.

I've queried why he is being fined, but I wasn't and their reply was because he was abusive to staff. He admits to swearing, but never threatened them at all. He apologised to a police officer, as we left the station, and he said "they've got targets to hit", which is why they are so hard on people.

Anyway, we've asked for copies of the body cam, but have been refused due to it being used in a prosecution! Presumably my husband's!

My question is, should he suck it up and pay, or do we have a chance in court?

Can't we say I was allowed to pay my fare and not fined, so it's inequality. Or even that we wanted to pay, but didn't have the opportunity to. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

A lot of advice on here and sadly the bottom line of it is probably all correct.

The background is that as a non regular rail traveller you have found out about the govt's 'hostile environment policy' they are farcing train operators to adopt - this also relates to the govt desire to remove as many customer facing staff as possible and get to the point of a residual staff whose role is more about enforcement than customer service - so penalty fares and enforcement etc - this is of course balanced against the widespread problems of fare evasion on UK trains where far too many people think they don't need to bother to pay. Honest people trying to buy a ticket get caught up in all this.

Then when faced with the hostile policy in action you take umbridge and use language that is 'over the line' you are another easy target for a penalty.

Sadly I can see the whole experience being one where you won't rush to be a repeat customer of the railway - but then Northern and the govt don't much care about that I don't think.

Sorry your whole experience turned out like this.

 

[AlbertBeale]

It is the wording Northern use.

It's clear from the correspondence upthread that this 'fixed penalty' is issued by Northern, and they don't issue 'fines' (in the specific legal sense) for public order.

A Penalty Notice for Disorder (PND) is also either £50 or £80. As far as I can see it is clear that this is a settlement offer from Northern.

I feel the legal background to the only part of the communication we've seen here is unclear. Is it an out-of-court settlement offer to avoid a prosecution? If so - what for? Not paying the fare (the two being treated differently could mean that one person was treated leniently, rather than that one has been treated harshly)? Or for a different byelaw offence? Or is there some "fixed penalty" option available to the railways for some alleged offences, with the threat of a prosecution if unpaid? (The last seems the least likely, from what others have said here; though the message we've been shown specifically says "fixed penalty", not out-of-court settlement. In which case, penalty for what alleged offence exactly?)

It's a pity that no other paperwork is available - not even, it seems, the e-mail which led to the e-mail reply we've been shown... There could be an angle here that no-one has picked up on, in the absence of the full paper trail.

Having said that, the "least painful" course might well be to simply pay the £100 and have done with it - as others have recommended.

 

[furlong]

I feel the legal background to the only part of the communication we've seen here is unclear.

There's no mystery. This has already been answered: It'll be Northern's usual controversial offer of an out-of-court settlement disguised to look as though it's a penalty that must be paid. (Search this forum for 'Penalty Fake', the nickname some give it, if you're unfamiliar.)

 

[AlbertBeale]

There's no mystery. This has already been answered: It'll be Northern's usual controversial offer of an out-of-court settlement disguised to look as though it's a penalty that must be paid. (Search this forum for 'Penalty Fake', the nickname some give it, if you're unfamiliar.)

Thanks - I hadn't come across the term and didn't realise Northern had form re this. But isn't it a bit legally "naughty" not to be clear about the formal basis of an offer? Surely a court - in any subsequent hearing - would take a dim view?

 

[island]

Thanks - I hadn't come across the term and didn't realise Northern had form re this. But isn't it a bit legally "naughty" not to be clear about the formal basis of an offer? Surely a court - in any subsequent hearing - would take a dim view?

I would suggest starting a new thread to discuss that, to avoid confusing the OP.

 

[littlevix]

A few months ago my husband and I travelled from Westhoughton to Manchester Victoria. The train pulled in as we arrived. We got on, bought a duo return ticket from the lady and enjoyed our day.

A few weeks later we did the exact same thing. Got on the train, intending to purchase a duo ticket, as its cheaper than buying 2 return fares. This time there was nobody on board to purchase the tickets from.

As soon as we arrived into Manchester we approached a member of staff and asked to purchase tickets. Immediately the guy said he was fining us. He was really rude and my husband was rude back to him. Several staff and police wandered over and eventually a different staff member advised that if I gave him our details he would file an incident report, but that we would NOT receive a fine. My husband made sure that this was recorded by the body cams, in case we were fined.

After receiving correspondence from National rail, I advised as above. I was asked to pay the fare amount and no further action taken.

However, my husband has been given a fixed penalty notice for £100.

I've queried why he is being fined, but I wasn't and their reply was because he was abusive to staff. He admits to swearing, but never threatened them at all. He apologised to a police officer, as we left the station, and he said "they've got targets to hit", which is why they are so hard on people.

Anyway, we've asked for copies of the body cam, but have been refused due to it being used in a prosecution! Presumably my husband's!

My question is, should he suck it up and pay, or do we have a chance in court?

Can't we say I was allowed to pay my fare and not fined, so it's inequality. Or even that we wanted to pay, but didn't have the opportunity to. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

Just wanted to say thank you for advise. We've decided to pay the penalty. Thanks again.