Commuters who appeal penalty fares risk criminal record

Yahoo

4 hours ago

SCHEDULE FOR 6.30AM LIVE PRIORITY TAG
Commuters who challenge train ticket inspectors now risk getting a criminal record, The Telegraph can reveal.
Passengers who are handed penalty fares for making mistakes when buying their tickets can now be prosecuted as criminals if their appeals against those penalties are rejected.
Rules have changed thanks to a judgment made by the Chief Magistrate earlier this year, the existence of which The Telegraph is revealing now.
Penalty fares are given to train passengers who cannot produce a valid ticket when asked by an inspector.
The rule change, likely to affect tens of millions of journeys per year, comes after the Office of Rail and Road warned train companies last week to stop punishing people who make 'seemingly unintentional or minor transgressions of fares and ticketing rules'.
Public concern about fare-dodging has reached a high point after Robert Jenrick, the Conservative shadow justice secretary, was filmed challenging miscreants in London.
Credit: X/@RobertJenrick
Yet those who formally dispute an inspector's view of the notoriously complex web of British train ticketing rules could now find themselves with a criminal record if they stand up for what they believe is right.
Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring said in a written ruling dated February 21, which has not previously been published: 'I rule that criminal prosecutions can be brought following a penalty fare appeal being dismissed…'
The judge said he had been given 'an undertaking that all [Department for Transport Train Operating Companies] will follow the guidance given by the court'.
Fines of up to £1,000 and, for repeat offenders, prison sentences of up to three months can result from a conviction for failing to produce a ticket or travelling with intent to avoid payment.
A conviction under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 will appear on DBS background checks, potentially affecting someone's job prospects.
Campaigners fear that Judge Goldspring's ruling has given train companies a green light to threaten honest but mistaken commuters with a criminal record as the price of challenging ticket inspectors.
Christian Waters, 47, of Leeds, who was targeted for prosecution in 2022 after having his penalty fare appeal rejected, said: 'Why was this ruling not published, given it affects the protection that hundreds of thousands of passengers would assume they had from the regulations?
Mr Waters, whose case was dropped after he realised that Government-owned rail company Northern had broken the rules by trying to haul him in front of a judge, said: 'I do feel like they are saying I got off on a technicality now. I still dispute that I did anything wrong; their machine was not working!'
'No one has any protection at all, a sham of an appeal system and then money [is] demanded backed up by criminal law,' he continued.
Westminster magistrates' court's unpublicised ruling came about after another Government-owned train company, Southeastern, asked the court if a number of previous prosecutions it brought were lawful. The exact number was not revealed in the judgment.
'It is clearly irrational that a person who brought an unmeritorious appeal could not be prosecuted, whereas someone who did not appeal could be,' ruled Judge Goldspring.
While an out-of-court appeals process exists for penalty fares, Parliament never intended for commuters to be criminalised when it created the scheme some 35 years ago.
Introducing the 1988 law that created penalty fares, Tory peer Lord Marshall of Leeds told Parliament: 'If, however, a passenger on a train is not in possession of a ticket, he is not to be treated as a criminal under this Bill. He is simply asked to pay a penalty fare, which is a civil penalty and not a criminal one.'
Today, Regulation 11(3) of the Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 says that prosecution is only allowed where the penalty has been cancelled by the train company before the appeal panel has decided the outcome.
Yet in his February 2025 ruling, Judge Goldspring said: 'The prosecutor obviously should not bring a prosecution if it is excluded,' but added: 'There is no obligation on the court to investigate whether the defendant has a defence.'
Penalty fare appeals are decided on by a private company called Appeal Services, which is a contractor paid by train companies to decide penalty fare appeals.
According to Appeal Services' website, in the last 28 days, its assessors rejected 80 per cent of first-stage appeals.
Southeastern and the Department for Transport were contacted for comment.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.