Please help, court summons letter

[captain_hook]

Hi All,

Please advise on the following situation. I will try to make it short whilst providing as much information as possible.

We are relatively new in the UK - I came 4 years ago and my wife came 3 years ago.

We moved to Woking last year and never used trains from there as I work there and my wife was on maternityicon leave.

She returned to work on September and when she was buying tickets from Woking to Bond Street (she is working there) the officer advised the best option would be to buy a weekly ticket from Woking to Addlestone and buy a Zones 1-2 Oyster Travelcard. He explained that one can travel from Woking to Addlestone via Clapham Junction and as she also has Zones 1-2 Travelcard, her ticket will be valid from Clapham Junction to Waterloo and then to Bond Street. So she can use it to travel from Woking to Waterloo and then from Waterloo to Bond Street. She purchased that 2 seasonal tickets and was travelling all September from Woking to Waterloo and then from Waterloo to Bond Street.

Trains from Woking to Waterloo are regularly checked by on-train ticket inspectors and she never had any issues with them; they were checking her almost every day and saying that her tickets are valid and correct. So she traveled like this all September without any issues.

On 1st of October, when she touched out in Waterloo Station, she was approached by a man who called himself a ticket inspector and he asked her to show her tickets. She did this and then he said that her tickets are not valid and she cannot travel using the tickets. She was a bit surprised and explained that on-train tickets inspectors were checking her almost every day and she never had any issues. He said that it doesn't matter and asked her to provide her details which she did. She provided all the details correctly. He then took her tickets and said that they will contact her soon.

On the same day, when she came back to Woking, we approached to ticket officer and asked them to sell the most expensive ticket possible so that nobody could ever doubt it. And from that day she started to travel with the most expensive seasonal tickets. She is still travelling with that tickets.

I want to specifically mention that she NEVER intended to avoid buying tickets. The only reason why she was travelling this way is because she was originally advised by a ticket officer to buy these tickets and she also was checked by ticket inspectors from Woking to Waterloo train every day and nobody ever told her that tickets are wrong. So she never realized they might be wrong. If the tickets were wrong why ticket inspectors were saying they are ok? We are on visa in the UK and definitely don't want any troubles, so we always prefer to pay more but avoid any issues. The fact that she started to use the most expensive ticket right after the incident proofs that.

We've got the letter in December from SouthWest Trains Prosecution Department and they advised her to tell her version of the story. So she wrote them her answer, pretty much the same I wrote here.

We've got their response today and they are saying that she was using incorrect tickets from Woking to Waterloo and they are going to proceed this case to the court because her actions constitutes a breach of s.5(3)(b) of the Regulation of the Railways Act 1889.

This is pretty much the all story.

I really, really want your help and advise with this.

What can we do now? Can we sort this out by a phone and pay them the amount they want without going to court? If we hire a lawyer what are the chances that we will win the case? And if there is no way of avoiding going to court could you please advise which lawyer company is good with dealing with this?

We are obviously not millionaires but we don't care about the costs in this case; we both are honest skilled workers and on visa in the UK. We never had any issues before, never did anything dodgy, we just honestly working, paying taxes, respecting culture and laws and living a quiet family live with our baby without disturbing anybody. If she gets a criminal record we will not be able to extend our visa here, so will have to go back with our 1 year old baby, so this will literally ruin our life forever. So we are ready to pay whatever it is to avoid criminal record for her. Besides I really can't understand, if the tickets are wrong why on-board tickets inspectors were saying they are ok every single time they checked them? If the ticket inspectors ever advised that her tickets are wrong then she would have changed her tickets immediately like she did after this incident and the incident would not have been happen at all! I am really speechless!

I will greatly appreciate your help guys! Thanks a lot!

 

[bb21]

Welcome.

Your main problem, as you may have already guessed, is proving that you were indeed following advice from ticket office staff.

Not doubting what you said, but if we look at it from the train company's perspective, it does not look very good for you for several reasons.

Firstly railway staff are not normally permitted to advise passengers on split/combination tickets. The duty of ticket office staff is restricted to advising passengers on the cheapest through ticket. It is unusual for staff to be doing what you claimed as they risk being disciplined if caught. If you want to try and defend yourself, you may wish to see if your wife could locate the particular member of staff who advised as such and see if he would be willing to provide such a statement, although you are warned that chances of this happening is slim to none.

Secondly what she has done looks extremely like a classic act deployed by fare evaders, called "dumbbelling", ie. purchasing short-distance seasons at either end of the journey to get into/out of barriers but having no valid ticket for the journey in between. There is no way a ticket from Woking to Addlestone would be valid via Clapham Junction, and it is not a reasonable route because it takes much longer by taking a massive detour. All of the above mean that the claim that such advice was obtained from staff is not particularly believable. Therefore it is even more important to be able to prove your claims.

Finally even if that combination were valid via Clapham Junction (which it is not), because she is using two season tickets, the train must stop at the station where she changes from one ticket to the other. That means Clapham Junction or Vauxhall. If she alighted from a train which ran non-stop through those stations, she would not have been valid for this reason either.

So far, all evidence points to a clear case of fare evasion (as set out under Section 5.3(b) in your case) AIUI. Without anything pointing to the contrary, my opinion is that you stand very little chance of defending this charge.

The argument with regard to onboard checks is a red herring. The responsibility for ensuring that valid ticket(s) were held remains with the passenger.

An out-of-court settlement is a possibility. Has a court date been set? From what you said, I assume not yet. There is no guarantee that they would accept any out-of-court settlement, but you don't get what you don't ask for.

 

[455driver]

Having the tickets checked on the train only proves that they were valid when and where they were checked-
Say the train travels from A-B-C-D-E, and you only hold tickets from A-B and D-E, as long as the tickets are only checked between A and B or D and E then you will be travelling on valid tickets, so isnt much of a defence.

If you use a season ticket calculator does it give the option of the tickets your partner holds, that would prove validity, if it doesnt then it wont actually necessarily prove they are not valid though.

Edit-

I have tried to force a route from Woking-Clapham jn-Staines- Addlestone and it wont allow the route at all so I dont see how a Woking to Addlestone (season) ticket is valid via Clapham jn, although there are many people on here more au-fey with ticketing than I am.

Another edit-

What trains did she catch from Woking?
Was it the fast ones from platform 2 (which dont stop at Weybridge) or the stoppers from either platform 1 or 3 (which do)!

 

[captain_hook]

Thanks a lot, bb21, for your detailed and quick response!

We did not get any court date yet. I was thinking about out of court settlement, but wanted to ask here first.

I also don't think the guy will agree to confirm he said so, but here goes nothing; we will try to find him at the station and ask to confirm. It usually works this way: when they don't want they simply "forget" that they ever seen you before in their life.

Again, she never intended to do anything dodgy. We are guests in this country and our aim is to do anything legally not just trying to cheat. It is very silly buying dodgy tickets and risking your visa, work and future. I know that rail company doesn't care, all they care is their money, nothing else.

I still cannot understand why it is a red herring with on-board ticket inspector? My understanding is that ticket inspectors are the authorized people who check if the passenger has a valid ticket and penalize them if they not. The ticket inspector represents the company and its interests. If they say the ticket is correct but it is not then they are obviously providing a misleading information and confusing the passenger. They checked her on the very first day of her travelling (this can be easily proofed by CCTV recordings) and said that her ticket is correct all the time, every single day! This also can be easily checked with CCTV! If they ever advised that her tickets are wrong then she would have changed her tickets immediately like she did after this incident and the incident would not have been happen at all! So what's the point of having a ticket inspector if they are useless and providing a misleading information that causes this? If she had a wrong tickets then why ticket inspectors did not stop her at the very first day? The national rail blames her that she was travelling a month with that tickets, but why then the ticket inspectors did not stop her? Why they did not advise her ticket is wrong when they checked her? I really can't understand this.

Ok you will say is passenger's responsibility to have a valid ticket, but agree with me that people are not lawyers, they should not know all the laws point by point! They are just passengers who is approached by a authorized member who checks their tickets and says they are ok. If the authorized and trained member says they are ok what should we, passengers, say?

Correct me if I am wrong, but it really makes no sense.

Is it possible to use this argument? I understand rail company closes their eyes on everything they don't want to hear, but at the end of the day the court is for finding out the truth not just rail company's interests.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Having the tickets checked on the train only proves that they were valid when and where they were checked-
Say the train travels from A-B-C-D-E, and you only hold tickets from A-B and D-E, as long as the tickets are only checked between A and B or D and E then you will be travelling on valid tickets, so isnt much of a defence.

If you use a season ticket calculator does it give the option of the tickets your partner holds, that would prove validity, if it doesnt then it wont actually necessarily prove they are not valid though.

Edit-

I have tried to force a route from Woking-Clapham jn-Staines- Addlestone and it wont allow the route at all so I dont see how a Woking to Addlestone (season) ticket is valid via Clapham jn, although there are many people on here more au-fey with ticketing than I am.

Another edit-

What trains did she catch from Woking?
Was it the fast ones from platform 2 (which dont stop at Weybridge) or the stoppers from either platform 1 or 3 (which do)!

Thanks for your reply!

She was always travelling on Woking - Waterloo train that stops at Clapham Junction. And she was checked on that specific train every day.

So the bottom line is: she was taking the train Woking - Waterloo via Clapham Junction every day. Ticket inspectors on that train were checking her every day and saying the tickets she has are correct (this can be proofed by CCTV). But in letter we got today they are saying the same tickets are not correct to travel on the same train from Woking to Waterloo.

So he have contradictions: on the one hand on-board ticket inspectors saying the ticket are correct but on the other hand SouthWest Trains prosecution department says they are not. Where is the truth?

SouthWest trains blames her that she was using that tickets for a month, but why then the same ticket inspectors on board were saying the tickets are correct?

 

[455driver]

Between what stations were her tickets checked, and was it fast or slow trains she caught from Woking?
What time did the train leave Woking, what platform did it leave from?

 

[captain_hook]

Between what stations were her tickets checked, I have already answered that bit.

Thanks, her tickets were checking between Woking and Waterloo. The Woking - Waterloo service she always used was either Woking - Clapham Junction - Waterloo or Woking - Waterloo only. In both cases she was checked all the time and ticket inspectors were saying the tickets are ok.

 

[bb21]

The reason I say that it is a red herring is that not being pulled up on-train only means that her ticket irregularity was not spotted. No more and no less. The responsibility for ensuring that valid tickets were held remains with the passenger as I said earlier, not with onboard staff.

With regard to your point that individuals should not be expected to know every minute detail of every law, that is true, but if a law is broken, ignorance alone provides no excuse. I can understand your frustration at being mis-advised by ticket office staff. It is a very unfortunate turn of events, but from what you have described I simply can't see any good counter-argument without anything to show this.

 

[captain_hook]

The reason I say that it is a red herring is that not being pulled up on-train only means that her ticket irregularity was not spotted. No more and no less. The responsibility for ensuring that valid tickets were held remains with the passenger as I said earlier, not with onboard staff.

With regard to your point that individuals should not be expected to know every minute detail of every law, that is true, but if a law is broken, ignorance alone provides no excuse. I can understand your frustration at being mis-advised by ticket office staff. It is a very unfortunate turn of events, but from what you have described I simply can't see any good counter-argument without anything to show this.

Thanks bb21! Really appreciate your responses!

So the bottom line is that ticket inspectors, rail officers and all other authorized personnel cam simply lie to you and provide a misleading information and then prosecute you only because they provided a false information? So they can close their eyes on their mistakes but point on yours.

In the letter they sent it says that "the offence was not suitable for discharge by a Penalty Fare Notice". Does it mean we cannot agree out of court payments? Thanks.

 

[bb21]

Thanks bb21! Really appreciate your responses!

So the bottom line is that ticket inspectors, rail officers and all other authorized personnel cam simply lie to you and provide a misleading information and then prosecute you only because they provided a false information? So they can close their eyes on their mistakes but point on yours.

I doubt any staff would deliberately lie in that respect, but the system does base itself on a certain degree of professional trust.

Guards only have a few seconds to inspect each ticket on a commuter line, so it is not possible to examine each ticket in great details. They invariably look out for things they consider most important, such as the expiry date. What each member of staff looks at can vary a great deal. Some might focus on matching Photocard ID and season ticket, others destination. Some will not even pay much attention to the ticket itself initially, but watch people's reactions and sometimes there are tell-tale signs when someone is on the dodgy side.

Railway staff do make mistakes, of course. Unfortunately the way railway legislation works the odds are stacked heavily against the passenger should such an error result in the passenger travelling on invalid tickets. It is not an ideal situation, but one that we are stuck with for now. You often see discretion being used when a ticket irregularity is detected, however I believe that season ticket fraud is one which all train companies take a very dim view of, hence the apparently heavy-handed approach.

In the letter they sent it says that "the offence was not suitable for discharge by a Penalty Fare Notice". Does it mean we cannot agree out of court payments? Thanks.

That just means that it is not a suitable offence in their opinion for a Penalty Fare.

 

[najaB]

In the letter they sent it says that "the offence was not suitable for discharge by a Penalty Fare Notice". Does it mean we cannot agree out of court payments? Thanks.

No, it doesn't mean that. There is always the possibility of an out of court settlement, regardless of the offense.

What that statement means is that, in the opinion of the TOC, it wasn't a simple, one-off mistake and so they won't just offer a penalty fare.

 

[captain_hook]

Thanks a lot guys for your advise and sorry if I was a bit grumpy, I am just a bit emotional on all this, especially when I know we never tried to cheat or something!

I will then ask her to give them a call on Monday and ask if this can be sorted out of court.

Are there any tips on how to speak with them to convenience to sort this out without court? Thanks.

Also, does she need to call them first and agree on the phone and then write an out of court letter? Or directly write the letter? Thanks.

Thanks a lot, all! I really appreciate your help and advise! Apologies if I was a bit grumpy, I am just very emotional because of all this.

I will ask my wife to call them on Monday and hopefully they will agree to sort this out of court.

Is there anything specific she needs to tell them? And does she need to write a letter as well or just call first? Thanks.

 

[PermitToTravel]

I also don't think the guy will agree to confirm he said so, but here goes nothing; we will try to find him at the station and ask to confirm. It usually works this way: when they don't want they simply "forget" that they ever seen you before in their life.

I'm curious how you already know what's going to happen in that respect. In what comparable or similar situations has someone forgotten to have seen you before?

 

[maniacmartin]

Tickets to London are perhaps the most sold tickets at Working ticket office. I am struggling to believe that any clerk there would recommend such a combination unless these tickets were specifically asked for.

Were the tickets sold in the same transaction? If they are not (and SWT could check), then your story wouldn't really make sense.

Regarding gateline staff, onboard staff etc: Unless you specifically ask them for advice on whether a ticket is valid, then you can't draw any conclusions from them not spotting the fact that they don't join up. Were both tickets always shown at the same time?

It is vastly more probable that she knew that the tickets didn't join up, and you are testing your excuse here. I don't think it's plausible enough to get Mrs Hook off the hook.

 

[captain_hook]

I'm curious how you already know what's going to happen in that respect. In what comparable or similar situations has someone forgotten to have seen you before?

Hi there. I don't know for sure but I guess that not every person will agree to go to court and make a statement against their own company in favor of a stranger. I do recognize that this might happen, but chances are very low. We will try to find the clerk, but I want to see if there is anything else we can do.

 

[Clip]

Thanks bb21! Really appreciate your responses!

So the bottom line is that ticket inspectors, rail officers and all other authorized personnel cam simply lie to you and provide a misleading information and then prosecute you only because they provided a false information? So they can close their eyes on their mistakes but point on yours.
.

That is a mightily big claim and not one that I would go forward with in your attempt at mitigation.

 

[captain_hook]

Tickets to London are perhaps the most sold tickets at Working ticket office. I am struggling to believe that any clerk there would recommend such a combination unless these tickets were specifically asked for.

Were the tickets sold in the same transaction? If they are not (and SWT could check), then your story wouldn't really make sense.

Regarding gateline staff, onboard staff etc: Unless you specifically ask them for advice on whether a ticket is valid, then you can't draw any conclusions from them not spotting the fact that they don't join up. Were both tickets always shown at the same time?

It is vastly more probable that she knew that the tickets didn't join up, and you are testing your excuse here. I don't think it's plausible enough to get Mrs Hook off the hook.

Hi there and thanks for your reply.

If I was trying to test my excuses here I would simply won't bother to open the topic and make people spend their time on this. Why should I test my excuses? Am I in court? Are you going to judge me? I am in a public forum where I am seeking for a help of people who know more about this, it's nothing about excuses, it's all about information and advise. I think it should be clear enough and really don't understand why are saying so. If you don't believe me then it's really your choice. I can likewise say that you defend rail company that simply closes their eyes on their own mistakes and points on mistakes of the others. The truth is that the ticket is either valid or not. If one inspector says it's valid and another one says it's not then it is definitely not my fault, but company's as they probably don't provide an appropriate professional training. That's what I think personally and that's what is logically correct.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Are there any tips on how to speak with them to convenience to sort this out without court?

Yes.
Patience. And Professionalism.

It may take a long time to get through to the person you need to speak to, and it may require you taking a detached viewpoint to avoid being argumentative. Remember, you ae not making the call to dispute the issues which you have acknowledged are emotionaly powerful.

But before you do call the Company, I think there is something you can help us with to be sure we are giving you appropriate advice. We need to be clear about your statement that the clerk in the ticket office advised this combination of tickets to your wife. It's important because (as I hope you now realise) it is NOT an appropriate combination of tickets for the journey, and working at that station, I would expect all the knowledge of the ticket staff there to include the ticket zones on their local lines to London.

What we need to know, as accurately as you can remember, is:

1. what exactly did your wife ask for at the ticket office?
2. what exactly was the ticket clerk's reply?

Any advice should be informed by the facts of those statements.
Thanks

- - - EDIT - - - -

I should add, that the response of the Company's Investigating Officer that you speak to will also be informed by these same facts.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Hi there and thanks for your reply.

The tickets were sold on the same transaction. We do have bank statements for that. And yes both tickets were shown on the same time. I believe this can be easily chased by a CCTV. But will they chase something that it is not beneficial for them?

If you've evidence that they were sold in the same transaction then I'd consider seeking legal advice as this stage and not settling out of court. Staff can give permission to travel without a valid ticket.

 

[captain_hook]

That is a mightily big claim and not one that I would go forward with in your attempt at mitigation.

Thanks for you reply. It is not a claim but a question with a question mark at the end. I asked this question because if they check for tickets and say they are correct but then one of their colleagues says they are not than obviously I can think that something is wrong and just ask this question as for me it is a bit misleading. It's not like I am doing an official claim, I just discussing the answers here with my very own opinion.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Tickets to London are perhaps the most sold tickets at Working ticket office. I am struggling to believe that any clerk there would recommend such a combination unless these tickets were specifically asked for.

I have to agree with this.

In fact I would go further and say season tickets (Gold Cards) to London are probably the most sold tickets at Woking.

I just can't see anyone advising the combination used. I'm not sure the single transaction thing would help either. Reason being, If you ask for those tickets, there is nothing legally stopping them selling them to you.

They may well advise strongly advise against it, and may well mention something to an RPI when they visit the station, who can then investigate.

I'm sorry OP but things aren't adding up in my mind.

 

[Geronimo]

I doubt any staff would deliberately lie in that respect, but the system does base itself on a certain degree of professional trust.

Indeed. A ticket clerk could deliberately put someone in a delicate position by sheer malice (not an attack on railway staff, just a comment on human nature, also not implying that it is what happened here).

In fact, the potential for maliciously exploiting railway regulations to create misery for others is truly quite frightening.

 

[PermitToTravel]

I just can't see anyone advising the combination used. I'm not sure the single transaction thing would help either. Reason being, If you ask for those tickets, there is nothing legally stopping them selling them to you.

That's true. If that is what happened and Cpt. Hook disputes it then I imagine that SWT would give evidence from the booking clerk in court.

I cannot fathom why the OP is so eager to settle out of court if everything is truly as he has told us.

 

[najaB]

I cannot fathom why the OP is so eager to settle out of court if everything is truly as he has told us.

Even if the OP is being totally honest, it could be to their advantage to settle out of court as having a matter before the courts possibly could have a negative impact on their dealings with the Home Office.

 

[captain_hook]

Yes.
Patience. And Professionalism.

It may take a long time to get through to the person you need to speak to, and it may require you taking a detached viewpoint to avoid being argumentative. Remember, you ae not making the call to dispute the issues which you have acknowledged are emotionaly powerful.

But before you do call the Company, I think there is something you can help us with to be sure we are giving you appropriate advice. We need to be clear about your statement that the clerk in the ticket office advised this combination of tickets to your wife. It's important because (as I hope you now realise) it is NOT an appropriate combination of tickets for the journey, and working at that station, I would expect all the knowledge of the ticket staff there to include the ticket zones on their local lines to London.

What we need to know, as accurately as you can remember, is:

1. what exactly did your wife ask for at the ticket office?
2. what exactly was the ticket clerk's reply?

Any advice should be informed by the facts of those statements.

Thanks a lot for your detailed advise and time! Really appreciate it!

I honestly don't know the answers of the questions as I wasn't with her on that time. I will ask her and provide an accurate information. Thanks a lot!

 

[PermitToTravel]

Even if the OP is being totally honest, it could be to their advantage to settle out of court as having a matter before the courts possibly could have a negative impact on their dealings with the Home Office.

Thank you - that's a good point

 

[captain_hook]

That's true. If that is what happened and Cpt. Hook disputes it then I imagine that SWT would give evidence from the booking clerk in court.

I cannot fathom why the OP is so eager to settle out of court if everything is truly as he has told us.

Hi Fahad,

I am not so eager because:

1. I would rather prefer to pay premium but know for sure that this is sorted than know that there is a chance (even if it's 1%)that the court will decide in their favor and this will ruin our life as we will have issues with Home Office.
2. Going to court means that we need to take day offs which is not something we can easily do because of specifics of our work.
3. Psychological stress.

So I will really prefer to sort this out of court no matter who is right or wrong and forget about this.

Thanks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So from all above topics I understand that even though we are genuinely honest, the chances are small that the court will believe us. Some stories might sound fantastic even though they are not lies.

I will in this case advise my wife to call them first thing Monday morning and see if we can sort this out of court. I really hope so, hopefully they will believe us and understand how important it is.

 

[najaB]

So from all above topics I understand that even though we are genuinely honest, the chances are small that the court will believe us. Some stories might sound fantastic even though they are not lies.

The issue isn't that the court is biased against you, it's that the TOC has an open and shut case your wife fare evaded, and your entire defence is that the person in the ticket office sold her an invalid, unusual (and illegal) combination of tickets.

Unless the person in the ticket office (a) remembers selling her the tickets; and (b) is willing to testify then the evidence outweighs anything she might say.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Indeed. A ticket clerk could deliberately put someone in a delicate position by sheer malice . . . . .

Really?

Well, you might think that. I can think of a number of other reasons why a clerk might give such incorrect 'advice' without having to make such accusations of malice, But do I hope you can see that none of this assists us in giving captain hook the information they have asked for in dealing with this matter in the way that they have chosen (and as they have asked for that advice).

I repeat to captain hook that the way to handle the conversation you wish to have with the Company is to be calm, positive, and supportive of reaching that resolution you want with a simplcity which is mutually acceptable. It is NOT the place to challenge other people's integrity, motives or abilities.
If you want to do any of these things, then that is fine, and I'm sure that people on here will assist you with that. But it's not what you've asked for and so you should be careful not to confuse your purpose in calling the Company with any of those other lines of argument.

 

[captain_hook]

Really?

Well, you might think that. I can think of a number of other reasons why a clerk might give such incorrect 'advice' without having to make such accusations of malice, But do I hope you can see that none of this assists us in giving captain hook the information they have asked for in dealing with this matter in the way that they have chosen (and as they have asked for that advice).

I repeat to captain hook that the way to handle the conversation you wish to have with the Company is to be calm, positive, and supportive of reaching that resolution you want with a simplcity which is mutually acceptable. It is NOT the place to challenge other people's integrity, motives or abilities.
If you want to do any of these things, then that is fine, and I'm sure that people on here will assist you with that. But it's not what you've asked for and so you should be careful not to confuse your purpose in calling the Company with any of those other lines of argument.

Thanks Dave! Yes you are right, emotions are not the best things in this case Well I am sure my wife will try to find a common solution, at the end of the day we are interested in this solution more than the company does.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The issue isn't that the court is biased against you, it's that the TOC has an open and shut case your wife fare evaded, and your entire defence is that the person in the ticket office sold her an invalid, unusual (and illegal) combination of tickets.

Unless the person in the ticket office (a) remembers selling her the tickets; and (b) is willing to testify then the evidence outweighs anything she might say.

Thanks NajaB!

So we can skip the fact that ticket inspectors did not say anything? It is not something we can use in the court?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Thanks a lot guys! Really appreciate all your help and effort!

 

[najaB]

So we can skip the fact that ticket inspectors did not say anything? It is not something we can use in the court?

Unfortunately, no.

As was pointed out earlier in the thread your wife had a valid ticket for the start and end of her journey. Unless you can prove that a ticket inspector saw both tickets in the middle of the journey, every single time she travelled then it doesn't hold any weight.