train fare fines

[jesta1865]

first up apologies if i've asked this before, i have a sense of deja vue about this post.

as many people have found the law surrounding 'fines' from private parking companies are still skewed towards the motorist (just) and they don't seem to be that enforcable.

as most of the train companies are now private, how can they enforce the on the spot fines for fare evasion.

now i am not advocating dodging fares, i would pay up straight away, but on c2c they say you may get a fine of up to £20, which to be honest i have always heard them demand. would not the same conditions that apply to the private parking companies not apply to them in that one individual can't 'fine' another, only the crown?

[kiethton]

Don't railways come under separate laws that permit additional rights?

Coming back to your parking law, tickets at railway station car parks are enforceable under a bylaw

[CraigyMc]

kiethton said:

Coming back to your parking law, tickets at railway station car parks are enforceable under a bylaw

Very debatable, given that the TOCs outsource it to companies like CP Plus - there seems to be no legislative recusal (ie the TOC can't delegate this legally).
There are tons of threads on pepipoo about it, have a read.

People have had tickets cancelled simply by writing to the station manager, not getting a reply then having it nullified by the TOC when it get as far as the ombudsman (for simply not seeing a reply).

[Jayho]

Isn't the main difference here that the train is providing a service which you have consumed? Whereas the parking fines you get from private land is a fee for overstaying rather than a service? And I thought the main loophole was that they can only charge the driver of the vehicle and not the registered keeper, and that you dont have to disclose who was driving?

On purposely not paying for a ticket for the train and then refusing the fine is in essence like getting a haircut and refusing to pay after the service is provided? Although I dont think a hairdresser would be able to fine you, they can call the police for theft?

[Cyberprog]

IIRC the railways have a whole raft of legislation and bylaws that have been around for years.

[oyster]

jesta1865 said:

first up apologies if i've asked this before, i have a sense of deja vue about this post.

as many people have found the law surrounding 'fines' from private parking companies are still skewed towards the motorist (just) and they don't seem to be that enforcable.

as most of the train companies are now private, how can they enforce the on the spot fines for fare evasion.

now i am not advocating dodging fares, i would pay up straight away, but on c2c they say you may get a fine of up to £20, which to be honest i have always heard them demand. would not the same conditions that apply to the private parking companies not apply to them in that one individual can't 'fine' another, only the crown?

Aren't the ticket inspectors fully able to call the police and/or take the matter to criminal court?

If so, I'd say a £20 fine is a nice easy way out.

[jesta1865]

oyster said:

Aren't the ticket inspectors fully able to call the police and/or take the matter to criminal court?

If so, I'd say a £20 fine is a nice easy way out.

i don't know, i did know someone who got done years back and he ended up in court, but its all be privatised since so i wondered if great swathes of the legislation didn't cover them now as they were a private enterprise.

[jesta1865]

Jayho said:

Isn't the main difference here that the train is providing a service which you have consumed? Whereas the parking fines you get from private land is a fee for overstaying rather than a service? And I thought the main loophole was that they can only charge the driver of the vehicle and not the registered keeper, and that you dont have to disclose who was driving?

On purposely not paying for a ticket for the train and then refusing the fine is in essence like getting a haircut and refusing to pay after the service is provided? Although I dont think a hairdresser would be able to fine you, they can call the police for theft?

yes but as in the case of the parking companies, surely if you cough up the fare then they haven't lost anything, the fine seems to add extra charges like the stupidly big ones that the parking companies seem to pluck from thin air.

[aw51 121565]

jesta1865 said:

oyster said:

Aren't the ticket inspectors fully able to call the police and/or take the matter to criminal court?

If so, I'd say a £20 fine is a nice easy way out.

i don't know, i did know someone who got done years back and he ended up in court, but its all be privatised since so i wondered if great swathes of the legislation didn't cover them now as they were a private enterprise.

British Transport Police .

[elanfan]

Humungous thread here (beware you can get convicted of an offence from the evidence of a Private Company - sucks doesn't it. Complain to your MP)

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=131...

[CraigyMc]

elanfan said:

Humungous thread here (beware you can get convicted of an offence from the evidence of a Private Company - sucks doesn't it. Complain to your MP)

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=131...

I've read about half of that thread, and by jove that mph chap wrote like a prize tool on it.

[elanfan]

CraigyMc said:

I've read about half of that thread, and by jove that mph chap wrote like a prize tool on it.

You might say that - I couldn't possibly comment.

[mph1977]

jesta1865 said:

first up apologies if i've asked this before, i have a sense of deja vue about this post.

as many people have found the law surrounding 'fines' from private parking companies are still skewed towards the motorist (just) and they don't seem to be that enforcable.

as most of the train companies are now private, how can they enforce the on the spot fines for fare evasion.

now i am not advocating dodging fares, i would pay up straight away, but on c2c they say you may get a fine of up to £20, which to be honest i have always heard them demand. would not the same conditions that apply to the private parking companies not apply to them in that one individual can't 'fine' another, only the crown?

because there is law and byelaws created by law that allows the railway companies to do this, same as councils etc can enforce certain other things. /thread

[Starfighter]

Laws that were created at the time of state ownership of the railways and all the associated trappings. Wasn't there a thread somewhere about someone's child being cought out on a train and offering to pay for the correct ticket and getting dragged through the courts anyway?

The criminal element of this should be sitting along side the de-criminalisation of the TV licence.

[mph1977]

Starfighter said:

Laws that were created at the time of state ownership of the railways and all the associated trappings. Wasn't there a thread somewhere about someone's child being cought out on a train and offering to pay for the correct ticket and getting dragged through the courts anyway?

The criminal element of this should be sitting along side the de-criminalisation of the TV licence.

Theft of service is still theft

travelling on the wrong ticket is fraud / obtaining advantage by deception


TV licensing decriminalisation is an acknowledgement that it is a hypotheticated tax rather than a licence per se , in much the same way that a lot of other tax transgressions are dealt with by penalty charges, saving criminal process for fraud and/or very high value issues.

[Red 4]

mph1977 said:

Theft of service is still theft

travelling on the wrong ticket is fraud / obtaining advantage by deception

It is neither theft nor fraud. Where is the theft ? Where is the deception ?

It is a specific offence under railways legislation though and (some) railways staff are able to enforce the legislation.

[mph1977]

Red 4 said:

mph1977 said:

Theft of service is still theft

travelling on the wrong ticket is fraud / obtaining advantage by deception

It is neither theft nor fraud.

It is a specific offence under railways legislation though and (some) railways staff are able to enforce the legislation.

A previous poster suggested that the legislation was outmoded as the railways were not state owned anymore and private organisations shouldn;t be able to make criminal prosecutions, It does not change the fact if you removed the specific legislation you still have a theft of service / fraud situation depending on whether people chose totravel without payign the fare or by paying the wrong fare ( over 16s travelling on child tickets, misuse of railcards etc)

[Red 4]

mph1977 said:

A previous poster suggested that the legislation was outmoded as the railways were not state owned anymore and private organisations shouldn;t be able to make criminal prosecutions, It does not change the fact if you removed the specific legislation you still have a theft of service / fraud situation depending on whether people chose totravel without payign the fare or by paying the wrong fare ( over 16s travelling on child tickets, misuse of railcards etc)

There's no such thing as "theft of a service". Theft relates to property only.

Fraud relates to deception offences/ fraud by abuse of position/ false representation, etc.

Like I said it is neither theft nor fraud.

Failing to buy a ticket is a completely different offence because the elements of theft and fraud are not present.

[mph1977]

Red 4 said:

mph1977 said:

A previous poster suggested that the legislation was outmoded as the railways were not state owned anymore and private organisations shouldn;t be able to make criminal prosecutions, It does not change the fact if you removed the specific legislation you still have a theft of service / fraud situation depending on whether people chose totravel without payign the fare or by paying the wrong fare ( over 16s travelling on child tickets, misuse of railcards etc)

There's no such thing as "theft of a service". Theft relates to property only.

Fraud relates to deception offences/ fraud by abuse of position/ false representation, etc.

Like I said it is neither theft nor fraud.

Failing to buy a ticket is a completely different offence because the elements of theft and fraud are not present.

stop playing semantic games you fractional wit

the semantics of it is why there is a specific offence rather than it being prosecuted under other legislation

are you really suggesting that unless there is a physical good no-one can have lost anything by not paying for a service ?

[Red 4]

mph1977 said:

1. stop playing semantic games you fractional wit

2. the semantics of it is why there is a specific offence rather than it being prosecuted under other legislation

3. are you really suggesting that unless there is a physical good no-one can have lost anything by not paying for a service ?

1. I'm not playing semantics.

2. You said it was theft and fraud. It isn't.

3. I didn't say that. I said it is neither theft nor fraud.

It isn't semantics. It's law.

You could argue it is obtaining services dishonestly - see Section 11 Fraud Act 2006 - if you can prove all the elements of the offence.

That still isn't fraud though

Edited by Red 4 on Friday 28th March 14:47