Pentaly Fare App Malfunction

[ForTheLoveOf]

Sorry I’m a little bit confused. Does that mean even if the speak is unsuccessful I would have to pay £138 even though it’s the wrong charge, simply because that’s what was written down.

No, rather that, the Regulations don't make provide any mechanism by which the Penalty Fare's amount can be changed once it has been issued. Thus it must be cancelled.

 

[furlong]

Sorry I’m a little bit confused. Does that mean even if the speak is unsuccessful I would have to pay £138 even though it’s the wrong charge, simply because that’s what was written down.

No, I mean the appeal panel has only two options - if it upholds the appeal, the money is paid back in full; if it doesn't, it isn't. It has no power to decide you need to pay some different amount. It can't even decide you still need to pay some normal fare for the journey! If the train company still feels entitled to a fare, it has to ask you for that separately afterwards (it cannot deduct it from the refund) and if you disagree, it must try its luck in the civil courts.

 

[QWERTY1]

No, I mean the appeal panel has only two options - if it upholds the appeal, the money is paid back in full; if it doesn't, it isn't. It has no power to decide you need to pay some different amount. It can't even decide you still need to pay some normal fare for the journey! If the train company still feels entitled to a fare, it has to ask you for that separately afterwards (it cannot deduct it from the refund) and if you disagree, it must try its luck in the civil courts.

Well I haven’t paid so there’s nothing to refund

I mean if the appeals people genuinely look into in some detail then they’ll see the amount is incorrect and if they aren’t able to alter amounts due it would suggest it will have to be cancelled

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I don't think we have a lot of experience to tell us whether or not the appeals body/ies are competent.

 

[QWERTY1]

Thought I’d provide an update. I heard back from the appeals people after what seemed an eternity. They said for a “ full investigation” they need to see the downloaded ticket which is difficult considering the nature of the problem!

Anyway, I didn’t mention in my first appeal about how the penalty was potentially the wrong amount under new guidelines so do you think it is worth appealing again on these grounds?

I’d assume the appeal place would have noticed the amount being wrong straight away if that was the case.

 

[najaB]

I’d assume the appeal place would have noticed the amount being wrong straight away if that was the case

Don't assume anything.

 

[QWERTY1]

Don't assume anything.

Haha very true although I would have thought that part of process within the appeals place would be to check the amount was correct first before processing. If anything I have learnt an awful lot about the legal system with regards to railways, genuinely very interesting

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Haha very true although I would have thought that part of process within the appeals place would be to check the amount was correct first before processing. If anything I have learnt an awful lot about the legal system with regards to railways, genuinely very interesting

It is possible to appeal a Penalty Fare on any grounds at any of the three stages of the appeal process. It is not necessary to use the same argument throughout.

Have Chiltern attempted to add on 'administration' fees to the alleged amount outstanding?

 

[QWERTY1]

It is possible to appeal a Penalty Fare on any grounds at any of the three stages of the appeal process. It is not necessary to use the same argument throughout.

Have Chiltern attempted to add on 'administration' fees to the alleged amount outstanding?

But surely If there is something fundamentally wrong with the the PF given then they should spot it.

And no they haven’t, is that possible?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

But surely If there is something fundamentally wrong with the the PF given then they should spot it.

And no they haven’t, is that possible?

The appeals body are only obliged to consider the arguments put to them. Whilst the Penalty Fare you were issued with is fundamentally void, it is probably just easiest to go with the flow of the "process".

There is no statutory footing for TOCs to charge administration fees on unpaid Penalty Fares, or even Unpaid Fares Notices. Nevertheless some try it on, and in certain cases it may still be the best approach to pay it if avoiding prosecution is essential (e.g. in a case of clear-cut fare evasion where a Penalty Fare has nevertheless been offered).

 

[QWERTY1]

The appeals body are only obliged to consider the arguments put to them. Whilst the Penalty Fare you were issued with is fundamentally void, it is probably just easiest to go with the flow of the "process".

There is no statutory footing for TOCs to charge administration fees on unpaid Penalty Fares, or even Unpaid Fares Notices. Nevertheless some try it on, and in certain cases it may still be the best approach to pay it if avoiding prosecution is essential (e.g. in a case of clear-cut fare evasion where a Penalty Fare has nevertheless been offered).

I see. So is there precedent for an appeal to be successful yet still face prosecution should the ToC not be happy with the outcome?

Also out of interest who pays for the appeals process?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I see. So is there precedent for an appeal to be successful yet still face prosecution should the ToC not be happy with the outcome?

Also out of interest who pays for the appeals process?

The TOC pays for the appeals process. However it is said that they pay the same fee regardless of the status (or success) of an appeal. I don't know whether or not that is true, although I would like to hope it is.

Regulation 11(3) of The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 would appear to suggest that the TOC who issued the Penalty Fare (or on whose behalf it was issued) is statute barred from instigating prosecution for an offence listed under Regulation 11(4) as soon as the appeals body has given its response to a first stage appeal, or upon the expiration of the 21 day period for the appeals body to give its response (i.e. if it doesn't response within the time period, the TOC is nevertheless statute barred from prosecuting).

The offences referred to under 11(4) are, in simple terms, a Railway Byelaws or RoRA offence.

So, if I am reading this correct (@furlong ?), it would seem that, in your case, Chiltern are statute barred from prosecuting, assuming it has been more than 21 days since you submitted your appeal. Has it?

If this is the case, it makes a powerful argument for immediately paying any Penalty Fare you are charged, and then immediately appealing it. Even if the appeal is unsuccessful, and even if you have to sue the TOC (or process a card chargeback or similar) to recover a wrongly issued Penalty Fare, it would appear they are barred from prosecuting you.

Note that, however, this statute bar does not apply to anyone other than the TOC on whose behalf the Penalty Fare was issued. So if you are issued with a Penalty Fare by one TOC (say, Chiltern) on behalf of another TOC (say, West Midlands Trains), you would still be liable to prosecution by anyone other than WMT, and I would imagine Chiltern for example might well choose to proceed to prosecution if you tried to further appeal against a Penalty Fare, or tried to chargeback it.

An interesting development!

 

[QWERTY1]

The TOC pays for the appeals process. However it is said that they pay the same fee regardless of the status (or success) of an appeal. I don't know whether or not that is true, although I would like to hope it is.

Regulation 11(3) of The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 would appear to suggest that the TOC who issued the Penalty Fare (or on whose behalf it was issued) is statute barred from instigating prosecution for an offence listed under Regulation 11(4) as soon as the appeals body has given its response to a first stage appeal, or upon the expiration of the 21 day period for the appeals body to give its response (i.e. if it doesn't response within the time period, the TOC is nevertheless statute barred from prosecuting).

The offences referred to under 11(4) are, in simple terms, a Railway Byelaws or RoRA offence.

So, if I am reading this correct (@furlong ?), it would seem that, in your case, Chiltern are statute barred from prosecuting, assuming it has been more than 21 days since you submitted your appeal. Has it?

If this is the case, it makes a powerful argument for immediately paying any Penalty Fare you are charged, and then immediately appealing it. Even if the appeal is unsuccessful, and even if you have to sue the TOC (or process a card chargeback or similar) to recover a wrongly issued Penalty Fare, it would appear they are barred from prosecuting you.

Note that, however, this statute bar does not apply to anyone other than the TOC on whose behalf the Penalty Fare was issued. So if you are issued with a Penalty Fare by one TOC (say, Chiltern) on behalf of another TOC (say, West Midlands Trains), you would still be liable to prosecution by anyone other than WMT, and I would imagine Chiltern for example might well choose to proceed to prosecution if you tried to further appeal against a Penalty Fare, or tried to chargeback it.

An interesting development!

The TOC pays for the appeals process. However it is said that they pay the same fee regardless of the status (or success) of an appeal. I don't know whether or not that is true, although I would like to hope it is.

Regulation 11(3) of The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 would appear to suggest that the TOC who issued the Penalty Fare (or on whose behalf it was issued) is statute barred from instigating prosecution for an offence listed under Regulation 11(4) as soon as the appeals body has given its response to a first stage appeal, or upon the expiration of the 21 day period for the appeals body to give its response (i.e. if it doesn't response within the time period, the TOC is nevertheless statute barred from prosecuting).

The offences referred to under 11(4) are, in simple terms, a Railway Byelaws or RoRA offence.

So, if I am reading this correct (@furlong ?), it would seem that, in your case, Chiltern are statute barred from prosecuting, assuming it has been more than 21 days since you submitted your appeal. Has it?

If this is the case, it makes a powerful argument for immediately paying any Penalty Fare you are charged, and then immediately appealing it. Even if the appeal is unsuccessful, and even if you have to sue the TOC (or process a card chargeback or similar) to recover a wrongly issued Penalty Fare, it would appear they are barred from prosecuting you.

Note that, however, this statute bar does not apply to anyone other than the TOC on whose behalf the Penalty Fare was issued. So if you are issued with a Penalty Fare by one TOC (say, Chiltern) on behalf of another TOC (say, West Midlands Trains), you would still be liable to prosecution by anyone other than WMT, and I would imagine Chiltern for example might well choose to proceed to prosecution if you tried to further appeal against a Penalty Fare, or tried to chargeback it.

An interesting development!

Sorry this has confused me a little bit!
I submitted my appeal on the 25th October and received a request for more information the other day.
With the amount of hassle it’s caused I’d have been better off just paying on the day and be done with it!

 

[QWERTY1]

Note that, however, this statute bar does not apply to anyone other than the TOC on whose behalf the Penalty Fare was issued. So if you are issued with a Penalty Fare by one TOC (say, Chiltern) on behalf of another TOC (say, West Midlands Trains), you would still be liable to prosecution by anyone other than WMT, and I would imagine Chiltern for example might well choose to proceed to prosecution if you tried to further appeal against a Penalty Fare, or tried to chargeback it.

Is it possible to find this sort of information out?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Sorry this has confused me a little bit!
I submitted my appeal on the 25th October and received a request for more information the other day.
With the amount of hassle it’s caused I’d have been better off just paying on the day and be done with it!

Well congratulations then; if I have understood it correctly, Chiltern are statute barred from prosecuting you now, as we are now 24 days after you submitted your appeal. Of course there is a minute possibility they cancelled the Penalty Fare without letting you know, but that seems extraordinarily unlikely.

Indeed, in disputes such as this, the rail industry often makes their procedures such that the easiest option is to pay up whatever ridiculous amount they are demanding. Of course the morally and financially prudent thing to do is to fight it all the way.

 

[QWERTY1]

Well congratulations then; if I have understood it correctly, Chiltern are statute barred from prosecuting you now, as we are now 24 days after you submitted your appeal. Of course there is a minute possibility they cancelled the Penalty Fare without letting you know, but that seems extraordinarily unlikely.

Indeed, in disputes such as this, the rail industry often makes their procedures such that the easiest option is to pay up whatever ridiculous amount they are demanding. Of course the morally and financially prudent thing to do is to fight it all the way.

What an absolute mindfield. Thanks for the all the info. Just a couple more questions if I could.

Let’s just say you have interpreted this correctly would they be barred from prosecuting for any offence say bylaws or fare evasion. And would the appeals service asking for further info cause a delay on the 21 one day limit.

Thanks again!

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

What an absolute mindfield. Thanks for the all the info. Just a couple more questions if I could.

Let’s just say you have interpreted this correctly would they be barred from prosecuting for any offence say bylaws or fare evasion. And would the appeals service asking for further info cause a delay on the 21 one day limit.

Thanks again!

As I understand it, yes, they cannot prosecute a Byelaws or RoRA offence. A different company could, but from what you've said, no-one else took your details in relation to this, so that does not appear likely to happen.

I cannot find any reference to the time period for an appeal response being extended because the Appeals Body ask for more evidence. As I understand it, they must base their decision on the evidence before them. Frankly, it shouldn't be difficult for them to come to the (correct) decision that the Penalty Fare is invalid, on the basis of the permission to board without being able to show a valid ticket, as well as the non-compliant signage, quite ignoring the aspect of breach of contract.

 

[QWERTY1]

As I understand it, yes, they cannot prosecute a Byelaws or RoRA offence. A different company could, but from what you've said, no-one else took your details in relation to this, so that does not appear likely to happen.

I cannot find any reference to the time period for an appeal response being extended because the Appeals Body ask for more evidence. As I understand it, they must base their decision on the evidence before them. Frankly, it shouldn't be difficult for them to come to the (correct) decision that the Penalty Fare is invalid, on the basis of the permission to board without being able to show a valid ticket, as well as the non-compliant signage, quite ignoring the aspect of breach of contract.

Thanks for all of this, much appreciated.

I meant to mention this to you actually. Leamington now has a large PF notice upon entrance to the station and several on the way to the platforms.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Thanks for all of this, much appreciated.

I meant to mention this to you actually. Leamington now has a large PF notice upon entrance to the station and several on the way to the platforms.

A notice that isn't compliant with the Regulations, and thus may as well not exist!

If you want help drafting up a second stage appeal point on this basis, I'm happy to help.

 

[QWERTY1]

Thought I’d provide a conclusion to this post. I received a reply from the appeals service saying that my appeal had been approved and the matter was now closed.

 

[najaB]

Thought I’d provide a conclusion to this post. I received a reply from the appeals service saying that my appeal had been approved and the matter was now closed.

Glad to hear that, thanks for letting us know.