The appeal was refused again!
This time there is no mention of Farringdon but they are claiming I had not touched in. (see image)
The Oyster statement shows a journey from Dagenham Dock to West Croydon charged at £2.80, which would seem to confirm that the card was approved for travel. Seems to be like Delay Repay where there are spurious reasons given for rejection and you have to keep retrying until they get it right.
When I make the final appeal is it worth also mentioning that the PF was wrongly issued because the next station was Norwood Junction and not East Croydon, as suggested by Watershed?
Oh dear. The statement clearly shows that you made a journey from Dagenham Dock. If your Oyster card wasn't validated, it wouldn't show that as your origin, it would show ??? (and you would have been charged for an incomplete journey). They seem to have difficulty in accepting any facts or assertions other than those made by GTR.
For your third stage appeal, you should raise any and all arguments you feel may be applicable.
Regulation 16(3) of the Penalty Fares Regulations sets out the possible grounds for appeal:
(a) the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of these Regulations;
(b) the appellant is not the person liable for the payment of the penalty fare;
(c) the appellant owns a season ticket valid for the journey in question but was not in possession of the season ticket at the time the penalty fare was charged; or
(d) there are compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the appellant should not be liable to pay the penalty fare.
(a) and (d) are the most likely candidates. In relation to (a),
Regulation 5(1) sets out that a Penalty Fare may be issued where:
a person fails to produce a platform ticket or a valid travel ticket in accordance with regulation 4
Regulation 3(1) defines "travel ticket" as:
a ticket or other authority which authorises a person to make a journey on a railway passenger service to which these Regulations apply
Condition 3.4 of the
Oyster Conditions of Use on National Rail Services states:
When you touch your Oyster card flat on the yellow card reader:
[yellow reader symbol]
a green light, accompanied by one beep ... means that it has been accepted for travel.
Condition 3.14 states:
At the station where you start your journey, you must touch your Oyster card flat on a yellow card reader (see clause 3.4) at the station ... At the end of your journey, you must touch your Oyster card flat on a yellow card reader at the station as you exit.
Furthermore, condition 3.18 states:
There is no need to touch your Oyster card on a yellow card reader when changing trains within the same station from National Rail to London Underground, DLR, TfL Rail or London Overground services, or vice versa.
Perhaps that's going into an excessive level of detail, but it demonstrates that the Conditions of Use support the fact that you acted perfectly correctly. So your ground of appeal here would be that, under regulation 16(3)(a), the penalty fare was not charged in accordance with the requirements of the Regulations as you held a valid authority, given that you complied with the Oyster Conditions of Use (this being proven by the statement).
You should also raise an appeal under regulation 16(3)(d), on the basis that, even in the counterfactual situation where you somehow hadn't touched in correctly, you have demonstrably paid the correct fare for your journey, and this constitutes a compelling reason why you should not be liable to pay a Penalty Fare. Admittedly this is perhaps somewhat of a collateral way of arguing the above argument again, but there's no harm in raising it.
Even if your third stage appeal is denied, it's not the end of the world. GTR might feel empowered to try and send you threatening letters chasing payment, and alleging that you now owe extra "administration" or "debt recovery" charges. Such claims have no legal basis and their only option remains to take you to County Court, should they wish. Of course, in the extremely unlikely event they did so, you would have all the evidence from your appeals to show that they are chancing their arm.
Do keep us updated as to the outcome of this latest appeal.