On 31 Oct, 08:31, Seamer wrote:

On Oct 30, 3:38*pm, wrote:

2. He decides to issue you with a penalty fare. *Once he has gone down
this route then you cannot be taken to court for fare evasion as this
would be considered double jepody

So you can see that is either court or penalty fare but not both. *In
the penalty fare case you can appeal to an independent adjudicator but
you will not get a criminal record whatever the outcome.

Isn't it actually the case that in 2. you can't be taken to court
because you've bought a valid ticket? Isn't that what a penalty fare
is - a hugely overpriced single ticket, that the rail companies "dress
up" as a fine? All you're actaully doing is buying an on-board single.

The question is what happens if you are issued a PF but then don't pay
it - in that scenario you haven't bought a valid ticket, merely been
issued with one on the understanding you'll pay later. (Does the law
even suggest that such an understanding has to be reached I wonder?
i.e. if the 'suspect' says that they won't pay the PF come whatever,
can a PF still be issued to them, given that there isn't an
understanding that they'll pay later?)

On Oct 31, 8:31*am, Seamer wrote:
2. He decides to issue you with a penalty fare. *Once he has gone down
this route then you cannot be taken to court for fare evasion as this
would be considered double jepody

So you can see that is either court or penalty fare but not both. *In
the penalty fare case you can appeal to an independent adjudicator but
you will not get a criminal record whatever the outcome.

Isn't it actually the case that in 2. you can't be taken to court
because you've bought a valid ticket? Isn't that what a penalty fare
is - a hugely overpriced single ticket, that the rail companies "dress
up" as a fine? All you're actaully doing is buying an on-board single.

Not quite. It's true that you can't be taken to court after paying a
penalty fare because it's considered to be a valid ticket, but it's
not just an expensive single.

This is clear because rail companies need to use a specific Act of
Parliament to issue penalty fares, and can't raise the fares or vary
the conditions without having the law changed - indeed, TfL is
currently promoting an Act of Parliament to raise the PFs on its
services and vary some of the conditions.

(not to be confused with certain long-distance rail companies charging
you an eye-wateringly expensive fare if you board without a / with the
wrong ticket - this is the regular Anytime Single fare).

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John B wrote:

This is clear because rail companies need to use a specific Act of
Parliament to issue penalty fares, and can't raise the fares or vary
the conditions without having the law changed - indeed, TfL is
currently promoting an Act of Parliament to raise the PFs on its
services and vary some of the conditions.

Er... that already happened.

That was the reason why I started this thread back on the 11th Oct...

http://www.tfl.gov.uk:80/corporate/m...tre/10025.aspx

Paul

On 31 Oct, 09:43, Mizter T wrote:
The question is what happens if you are issued a PF but then don't pay
it

I've done some reading of the actual law. A penalty fare is considered
a civil debt from the moment it's issued, at which point you're still
considered a fare evader. If you pay up, you no longer are. But if you
don't pay, the company can go after you for either the penalty fare
debt or the original fare evasion. It explicitly says if they do the
latter, the penalty fare is no longer owed.

You do have right of appeal, and you are required to be notified of
this right, and the burden is on the operator to disprove any claims
made in your appeal.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legis...altyfaresrules

(Does the law
even suggest that such an understanding has to be reached I wonder?
i.e. if the 'suspect' says that they won't pay the PF come whatever,
can a PF still be issued to them, given that there isn't an
understanding that they'll pay later?)

I can't see a specific rule saying when it's deemed to be charged -
presumably "when the ticket inspector decides so". It does say
refusing to give your name and address is an offence, so sticking your
fingers in your ears appears to be out.

U

On Oct 31, 2:16*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
* This is clear because rail companies need to use a specific Act of

Parliament to issue penalty fares, and can't raise the fares or vary
the conditions without having the law changed - indeed, TfL is
currently promoting an Act of Parliament to raise the PFs on its
services and vary some of the conditions.

Er... *that already happened.

That was the reason why I started this thread back on the 11th Oct...

http://www.tfl.gov.uk:80/corporate/m...tre/10025.aspx

Yeah, I realised that just after posting. But the person I replied to
clearly didn't...

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Richard Adamfi wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:

Fare-dodging isn't theft, as it doesn't deprive someone of the travel
you have "taken".

In England and Wales the illegality is in deliberately obtaining a
service by deception without making the appropriate payment (to use your
own word, "dodging" the fare rather than merely not having the
opportunity to pay it). It was a Theft Act 1968 offence ("obtaining a
pecuniary advantage by deception" but is now a Fraud Act 2006 offence
(which now seems to have at least three different ways of replacing the
older offence but the most direct replacement looks like s.11 "Obtaining
services dishonestly"). There is also the s.3 Theft Act 1978 offence of
"Making off without payment" available for use in appropriate circumstances.

In Scotland theft is a Common Law offence which IMU usually turns upon
the dishonesty of the action(s) in the relevant incident(s).

What I find curious is that you can end up with a criminal record for
fare-dodging, but not for avoiding parking charges.

It depends on how you avoid the parking charges.

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:20:49 -0700 (PDT), MIG
wrote:

Isn't that because penalty fare areas generally don't correspond to
routes on which the only affordable fares are limited to specific
trains?

I'm not so much talking about specific trains, but things like Off
Peak Returns where there can be genuine confusion. I don't think the
same "get-out" applies to AP tickets valid only on the printed train.
Indeed, these *can't* be excessed.

I don't know if it appears to TOC-specific tickets - these also can't
be excessed so possibly not.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:51:24 +0000, Richard Adamfi
wrote:

What I find curious is that you can end up with a criminal record for
fare-dodging, but not for avoiding parking charges.

This is true.

I think it would be far more sensible for the Penalty Fare to be
handled in that way. It might be reasonable, for short-distance
journeys, for it to be £60, increased to £120 if not paid within a
month, or discounted to £40 if paid on the spot or within 7 days, as
the amounts of money involved are comparable.

If it was set at that sort of level, there would be no need to
prosecute as the railway could avoid losing any actual money from fare
dodgers.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 06:58:44 -0700 (PDT), John B
wrote:

(not to be confused with certain long-distance rail companies charging
you an eye-wateringly expensive fare if you board without a / with the
wrong ticket - this is the regular Anytime Single fare).

Or bus companies' "Standard Fares" which don't come under the PF rules
either. I wonder why they don't have to follow it but the railway and
TfL do?

That said, I've never heard of a bus company actually charging one,
largely due to the lack of ticket inspectors. But, then again, some
don't see to care - MK Metro have been known to display posters
reading as follows, which I thought was a wonderfully British
non-deterrent:-

"Passengers must retain their tickets for possible inspection. If
found without a valid ticket, you will be required to pay the correct
fare for the journey you have made."

Really.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

In message , at 10:20:39 on Sat,
1 Nov 2008, Neil Williams remarked:
MK Metro have been known to display posters
reading as follows, which I thought was a wonderfully British
non-deterrent:-

"Passengers must retain their tickets for possible inspection. If
found without a valid ticket, you will be required to pay the correct
fare for the journey you have made."

Really.

Not quite as bad as it sounds. The "correct fare" on some First buses is
an approx £50 "Standard fare", unless bought from the driver when you
board the bus.
--
Roland Perry