South Western Railway penalty fare

[daurenabd]

Hello!
I was travelling from London Waterloo to Ascot (Berks) via South Western Railway. I tapped in via contactless payment at Waterloo without knowing that I need a separate ticket to travel to Ascot. An officer stopped me at the Ascot station barrier and issued me a penalty fare notice for £112.10 (£62.10 if paid in 3 weeks).

Is there any possibility for a successful appeal? It was my first time travelling that far outside of London using LWR, so I didn’t know that my contactless payment will become invalid. There was no intention to avoid paying the fare.

This information was written on my notice:
* Date/Time: 22/06/2024
* Issued at: Ascot (Berks)
* Issued on: Station at Barrier
* Issue Reason: Failed to Carry Season Ticket
* Grounds Info: Contact lens not valid
* From: London Waterloo
* To: Ascot (Berks)
* Class of Travel: Standard Class

 

[Gloster]

Although you have posted information, it would help the experts if you posted an image of the actual paperwork that you received. Please obscure your name address and any other identifying details, such as reference numbers.

 

[daurenabd]

Although you have posted information, it would help the experts if you posted an image of the actual paperwork that you received. Please obscure your name address and any other identifying details, such as reference numbers.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hello!
I was travelling from London Waterloo to Ascot (Berks) via South Western Railway. I tapped in via contactless payment at Waterloo w/o knowing that I need a separate ticket to travel to Ascot. An officer stopped me at the Ascot station barrier and issued me a penalty fare notice for £112.10 (£62.10 if paid in 3 weeks).

Is there any possibility for a successful appeal? It was my first time travelling that far outside of London using LWR, so I didn’t know that my contactless payment will become invalid. There was no intention to avoid paying the fare.

This information was written on my notice:
* Date/Time: 22/06/2024
* Issued at: Ascot (Berks)
* Issued on: Station at Barrier
* Issue Reason: Failed to Carry Season Ticket
* Grounds Info: Contact lens not valid
* From: London Waterloo
* To: Ascot (Berks)
* Class of Travel: Standard Class

Does it really say ‘contact lens’ - has the RPI been auto corrected?

 

[daurenabd]

Does it really say ‘contact lens’ - has the RPI been auto corrected?

I added posted photos of the notice. It really does say “contact lens”

 

[FuzzyDuck]

Presumably it should say "contactless"...?

 

[daurenabd]

Presumably it should say "contactless"...?

It should. Typo on the officer’s side, it happens

 

[swt_passenger]

I’m thinking “Failed to carry season ticket” is also spurious. I don’t think that’s the correct ”issue reason” to use if over travelling outside the Oyster or Contactless areas, so it’s possible the PF could be appealed on that basis, but there are people who know far more about grounds for appeal than I do.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Is there any possibility for a successful appeal?

There’s two approaches to this:
- the ‘rough and ready’: this says no, you won’t win an appeal in that penalty fares are designed for things like travelling without a ticket: that’s exactly what you did so pay up, learn your lesson and move on. Or there’s
- the ‘technical’: where the question is whether the railway has precisely met all the rules for issuing the penalty, so you check things like the exact wording of the notice, the amount charged, the signs at Waterloo and so on. If they have failed then you argue that they need to withdraw the penalty.

The railway naturally prefer the rough and ready approach and I would expect any technical appeal to be rejected at the first and second attempts because of this. There might be success at the third and final stage, and there will be people here who will advise on that. But if you are going to attempt a technical appeal be aware it will take some time and effort to get to the third stage: it’s going to have to be your decision whether it’s worth it to avoid the £50 penalty, or whether paying it is the best use of your resources.

 

[FenMan]

There’s two approaches to this:
- the ‘rough and ready’: this says no, you won’t win an appeal in that penalty fares are designed for things like travelling without a ticket: that’s exactly what you did so pay up, learn your lesson and move on. Or there’s
- the ‘technical’: where the question is whether the railway has precisely met all the rules for issuing the penalty, so you check things like the exact wording of the notice, the amount charged, the signs at Waterloo and so on. If they have failed then you argue that they need to withdraw the penalty.

The railway naturally prefer the rough and ready approach and I would expect any technical appeal to be rejected at the first and second attempts because of this. There might be success at the third and final stage, and there will be people here who will advise on that. But if you are going to attempt a technical appeal be aware it will take some time and effort to get to the third stage: it’s going to have to be your decision whether it’s worth it to avoid the £50 penalty, or whether paying it is the best use of your resources.

Another view would be to focus on the passenger, not the railway. Here we have a traveller who travelled from a gated station in London to an (in my experience, having only travelled there to go to the races) ungated station in Berkshire. The traveller used contactless to get through the barriers at the gated station and also say they knew they needed to buy an additional ticket to cover their actual journey, but mysteriously they failed to do so, despite the c.50 minute journey time.

The amount demanded = a £12.10 Evening Out/Sunday single fare plus £100, reduced by £50 if payment is made by SWR's deadline.

Forget the strange warble in the penalty fare notice - the amount is correct. Pay up, move on and don't chance your luck again, as your chances of being reported for prosecution, opening a whole new world of pain, would markedly increase if you repeat your behaviour.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The traveller used contactless to get through the barriers at the gated station and also say they knew they needed to buy an additional ticket to cover their actual journey

I was reading ‘w/o’ in the original post as meaning ‘without’.

 

[AlterEgo]

The railway naturally prefer the rough and ready approach

Or to put it another way, the approach which ignores the law.

That notwithstanding, the grounds info is correct even if there is a typo, and I can’t see any reason any technical appeal would succeed in this case.

Another view would be to focus on the passenger, not the railway. Here we have a traveller who travelled from a gated station in London to an (in my experience, having only travelled there to go to the races) ungated station in Berkshire. The traveller used contactless to get through the barriers at the gated station and also say they knew they needed to buy an additional ticket to cover their actual journey, but mysteriously they failed to do so, despite the c.50 minute journey time.

"w/o" means "without". Not common in British English, but common in other English variants.

 

[daurenabd]

Hey @FenMan,
Apollogies for misunderstanding, as other commenters have said, my "w/o" meant "without" as in "without knowing that I need a separate ticket". I've never intentionally avoided paying for anything in UK. I would gladly pay the full ticket price, but I find 100 GBP (or even 50 GBP) extremely harsh of a punishment for my inattentiveness, especially given that it was my first "offense".

I updated my original post.

 

[kristiang85]

Forget the strange warble in the penalty fare notice - the amount is correct. Pay up, move on and don't chance your luck again, as your chances of being reported for prosecution, opening a whole new world of pain, would markedly increase if you repeat your behaviour.

But the other view is that small mistakes made by passengers result in penalties, so why shouldn't sloppy paperwork from the railway be equally scrutinised?

If the passenger did change their luck then fair enough, but if it was a mistake (which at face value it seems to be), then it's worth appealing I'd say if there is an avenue to do so.

 

[FenMan]

Hey @FenMan,
Apollogies for misunderstanding, as other commenters have said, my "w/o" meant "without" as in "without knowing that I need a separate ticket". I've never intentionally avoided paying for anything in UK. I would gladly pay the full ticket price, but I find 100 GBP (or even 50 GBP) extremely harsh of a punishment for my inattentiveness, especially given that it was my first "offense".

I updated my original post.

And my apologies to you for not properly understanding what you were saying - I should have known.

 

[gray1404]

Appeal it on the basis that the notice has not been issued in accordance with the regulations. Namely that the grounds is incorrect. A season ticket does not come into it nor a contact lens.

 

[LYradial]

I agree that it should be appealed, this penalty fare notice is a legal document and the only evidence available.
it cannot now be changed, nor is there any leeway in the system for “typos” however small they may seem.

 

[Snow1964]

It is also worth checking if your tap in at Waterloo auto completed a journey (might have done it at TfL boundary, which is Feltham). If so you need to manually request a refund for that otherwise will pay for part of same journey twice, unless penalty has been raised from contactless boundary.

I am not sure about this point, but if contactless paid for part of your journey, then correct reason for penalty should be travelled beyond ticket validity (definitely not season ticket).

Just to complicate things, there are various info on the web with extension of contactless (known as project oval) which gives dates in last couple of years as commencement of being valid. (These dates have slipped, but none of TfL, DfT, or rail operator have removed all their former press releases etc with now superseded dates). So in an indirect way incorrectly advertised.

 

[43096]

It is also worth checking if your tap in at Waterloo auto completed a journey (might have done it at TfL boundary, which is Feltham). If so you need to manually request a refund for that otherwise will pay for part of same journey twice, unless penalty has been raised from contactless boundary.

I am not sure about this point, but if contactless paid for part of your journey, then correct reason for penalty should be travelled beyond ticket validity (definitely not season ticket).

Just to complicate things, there are various info on the web with extension of contactless (known as project oval) which gives dates in last couple of years as commencement of being valid. (These dates have slipped, but none of TfL, DfT, or rail operator have removed all their former press releases etc with now superseded dates). So in an indirect way incorrectly advertised.

But there are also usually announcements on SWR trains approaching Feltham stating that contactless/Oyster/Freedom passes are not valid beyond the next station without a suitable extension.

 

[Malaxa]

Are there on-board messages on these trains to the effect that contactless is not valid beyond Feltham, for example?

 

[SWT_USER]

Are there on-board messages on these trains to the effect that contactless is not valid beyond Feltham, for example?

Usually yes. Along the lines of 'Oyster, contactless and Freedom passes without a suitable extension are not valid beyond the next station'..

 

[43096]

Usually yes. Along the lines of 'Oyster, contactless and Freedom passes without a suitable extension are not valid beyond the next station'..

There are also usually information boards at Waterloo for big events at Ascot that make it clear that contactless/Oyster etc isn’t valid.

I’m also struggling with the idea that someone would go somewhere new and just assume that it is valid - if you don’t know, you check.

 

[SWT_USER]

There are also usually information boards at Waterloo for big events at Ascot that make it clear that contactless/Oyster etc isn’t valid.

I’m also struggling with the idea that someone would go somewhere new and just assume that it is valid - if you don’t know, you check.

I tend to agree.. although contactless is valid between London and Reading from Paddington, I can see people assuming it would be valid from Waterloo to Reading too.

 

[Deafdoggie]

There are also usually information boards at Waterloo for big events at Ascot that make it clear that contactless/Oyster etc isn’t valid.

I’m also struggling with the idea that someone would go somewhere new and just assume that it is valid - if you don’t know, you check.

I do get that. If you don't really use public transport and only use a regular journey where you tap in and out, why would you not think that happens everywhere?

 

[Malaxa]

I do get that. If you don't really use public transport and only use a regular journey where you tap in and out, why would you not think that happens everywhere?

Yes, tap in at a London terminal and the world or rather the country is your oyster [sic]

 

[Fiyero]

Usually yes. Along the lines of 'Oyster, contactless and Freedom passes without a suitable extension are not valid beyond the next station'..

There were lots of announcements on Saturday saying Oyster, Freedom passes etc... weren't valid to Ascot. So many that I doubted my trip to Twickenham was OK (it was of course!)