Independent review of train operators' revenue protection practices

Annex E: Flowcharts and indicative escalatory approach

This annex includes the following:

  • Figure E1: This diagram sets out an indicative escalatory approach to dealing with ticket irregularities, which is discussed further in paragraphs 4.76 to 4.83 of the report. It will be for industry and government to develop an escalatory approach, but this is intended to provide an overview what this could look like.
  • Figure E&W1.1: This flowchart shows the options for frontline staff in England and Wales where they find a passenger without a valid ticket.
  • Figure E&W1.2: Following on from Figure E&W1.1, this flowchart sets out the process following any action taken by a member of frontline staff and the potential outcomes for passengers.
  • Figure E&W2: This flowchart sets out the process in England and Wales for the prosecution of a passenger for a fare evasion or ticketing offence.
  • Figure S1: This flowchart sets out the options for frontline staff in Scotland where they find a passenger without a valid ticket, along with the different potential outcomes for the passenger.
  • Figure S2: This flowchart sets out the prosecution process in Scotland in relation to a fare evasion or ticketing offence.

Figure E1: Indicative escalatory approach to dealing with ticket irregularities

Figure E&W1.1: Invalid or no ticket - frontline options (England and Wales)

A flowchart showing the options available to frontline staff when they have identified a passenger on a train or in a compulsory ticket area as travelling without a valid ticket in England and Wales. Please note this is an indicative illustration and not reflective of all procedural possibilities. First, the staff member decides which action to take based on policy, training, circumstances and judgement. OPTION 1: The staff member may apply discretion, for example passenger is able to argue position. No further action. OPTION 2: If operator has yellow card scheme and passenger is identified, some operators may capture and record details and issue a yellow card if details are provided and it is the passenger’s first such detection, to the operator’s knowledge. OPTION 3: Rail staff may sell a ticket or excess fare (the difference between what was paid and the lowest price ticket available for immediate travel on that service). No further action. OPTION 4: Depending on operator policy and practice, an unpaid fare notice (UFN) or failure to purchase notice (FTP) may be issued. For next steps, start at A on outcomes flowchart (E&W1.2). OPTION 5: If the staff member is an authorised collector and if the passenger is travelling from a penalty fare station or in a compulsory travel area, the staff member may issue a penalty fare of £100 and the full applicable single fare for the journey, reduced to £50 if paid within 21 days (in England). In Wales, £20 or double the full single fare (whichever is greater). For next steps, start at B on outcomes flowchart (E&W1.2), OPTION 6: Rail staff may complete an IR or TIR with details to be passed to other rail staff to make decision on next steps. For next steps, start at C on outcomes flowchart (E&W1.2). OPTION 7: Staff member may produce an MG11 reporting the passenger for prosecution for a fare evasion offence. For next steps, start at D on outcomes flowchart (E&W1.2).

Figure E&W1.2: Invalid or no ticket routes and outcomes (England and Wales)

A flowchart showing the routes from different notices and reports through to different outcomes. Please note this is an indicative illustration and not reflective of all procedural possibilities. There are four start points on the flow chart, each corresponding to a different notice or reporting mechanism. A TOC or its agent may withdraw any notice or decide to take no further action at any point. As a case progresses some TOCs add admin fees and charges to the amount they are attempting to recover Start point A is an unpaid fare notice (UFN) or failure to purchase notice (FTP). This requires the passenger to pay the full fare. If a UFN or FTP is paid or successfully appealed or disputed, this leads to no further action. Appeal or dispute processes for UFNs vary by TOC. If a UFN is not successfully appealed or disputed and is not paid, this leads to a decision on next steps, which is explained in more detail below. Start point B is a penalty fare of £100 and the full applicable singe fare for the journey, reduced to £50 if paid within 21 days (in England). In Wales, it is a penalty fare of £20 or double the full single fare, whichever is greater. If the penalty fare is paid or successfully appealed at any of the three stages of appeal, this leads to no further action. If a passenger’s appeal is rejected at any stage and the passenger pays the penalty fare, this also leads to no further action. If a first or second stage appeal is not upheld, the passenger may appeal again. If a passenger has appealed the penalty fare three times, they cannot appeal the penalty fare again. If a passenger does not pay the penalty fare and does not or cannot appeal the penalty fare again, this leads to a decision on next steps, which is explained in more detail below. Start point C is a TIR or IR, which details an incident of suspected fare evasion or irregularity. If the TOC reports the passenger for prosecution using the TIR, without requesting payment, then the passenger will follow the prosecution process following from start point D, as outlined below. Otherwise, the TOC may give the passenger an opportunity to pay the unpaid fare (with or without admin charges) without reporting them for prosecution. If the passenger pays or provides mitigation which the TOC accepts, they will not be subject to further action. If a passenger does not pay the unpaid fare, and either no mitigation is provided or mitigation is not accepted, this leads to a decision on next steps, which is explained in more detail below. Decision on next steps: Following from start points A, B or C, once all opportunities to appeal, dispute, provide mitigation or pay have been exhausted and an unpaid fare is still outstanding, the TOC will make a decision on what to do next. The TOC may decide to file a civil claim to recover unpaid fares or penalty fares, which may be passed to debt recovery if the operator's civil claim is successful. A TOC may decide to take no further action to recover the unpaid fare. Alternatively, a TOC may decide to pursue a criminal prosecution. If the TOC decides to prosecute, it may need to cancel any outstanding penalty fare. The TOC would then follow the process from start point D. Start point D: a staff member produces an MG11 reporting the passenger for prosecution for a fare evasion offence. This may apply if a passenger was originally reported via an MG11, or via another notice or report per the “decision on next steps” described above. Where a criminal offence is suspected, further investigative actions may take place to gather necessary evidence prior to making a charging decision. After a passenger has been reported via an MG11, the TOC may request payment to discharge liability to prosecution, which may include fares and fees. If this is paid, the TOC will take no further action. Alternatively, a TOC may decide not to offer a settlement to discharge liability to prosecution. In either case, a passenger may provide mitigation to the TOC. The TOC may accept this and decide to take no further action. If the TOC has not already decided to take no further action, it will make a charging decision to decide whether to bring criminal charges. The TOC may decide to take no further action or to charge the passenger. Once the passenger has been charged, a criminal prosecution process will be followed via the courts. Outcomes include the operator withdrawing the charges in response to pre-trial mitigation or new evidence; an out-of-court settlement in which the passenger pays a settlement in exchange for the TOC dropping charges; an acquittal following a criminal hearing or a criminal conviction, for example following a guilty plea or trial.

Figure E&W2: Prosecution process (England and Wales)

A flowchart showing the criminal prosecution process starting from the charging decision. Please note this is an indicative illustration and not reflective of all procedural possibilities. Charges are selected based on the circumstances of individual cases, the evidence available and the TOC's policy and processes. The charging decision initiates a criminal prosecution. It may result in no charge (no further action) or it may result in a charge for a fare evasion offence. Potential charges include a charge for a byelaw offence (no intent), a summary-only offence. They also include a charge for a RoRA Section 5(1) (no intent) offence and a RoRA Section 5(3) (intent) offence. Both RoRA offences are summary-only. Alternatively, a charge for a Fraud Act offence may be brought, which is an either way offence. If a byelaw offence is charged, the TOC may prosecute via the SJP or Full Magistrates’ Court procedure. Under the SJP, the passenger may plead guilty, in which case a single justice would consider the case. A conviction resulting from a guilty plea under the SJP has no right of appeal. The Criminal Cases Review Commission may investigate alleged miscarriages of justice and refer cases for appeal, including where the normal appeals route has been exhausted or is unavailable. If the passenger pleads “not guilty” or chooses a Full Magistrates’ Court Hearing, the Full Magistrates’ Court process is to be followed. If the passenger does not respond to the SJP notice, a single justice will consider the case. The single justice may decide the case should be listed for a Magistrates’ Court trial, in which the Full Magistrates’ Court process is to be followed. Alternatively, the single justice may consider the case and find the passenger not guilty (acquittal) or guilty (conviction). If convicted under the SJP and unaware of proceedings, the convicted person may apply to set the conviction aside and re-open Magistrates' Court proceedings. RoRA Section 5(1) and RoRA Section 5(3) are both triable by the full Magistrates’ Court procedure only. A byelaw offence may be triable in the magistrates’ court if the TOC or passenger chooses this. Some operators have been erroneously using the single justice procedure to prosecute RoRA offences. This has been ruled unlawful and all such prosecutions void. Where a person is charged with a fare evasion offence and prosecuted via the full Magistrates’ Court procedure, before the trial the TOC may decide to withdraw the charges with or without a settlement agreement. In either case the TOC would take no further action. If the charges are not withdrawn, the case would be heard in the Magistrates’ Court and a plea entered by the passenger. A guilty plea would result in a conviction with no right of appeal. Note: the Criminal Cases Review Commission may investigate alleged miscarriages of justice and refer cases for appeal, including where normal appeals route has been exhausted or is unavailable. Alternatively, if a passenger pleads not guilty to the case a trial in the Magistrates’ Court would follow and the magistrates would make a decision on the case, either not guilty (acquittal) or guilty (conviction). A guilty verdict in the Magistrates’ Court may be appealed in the Crown Court (usually within 21 days). The process for Fraud Act offences is the same as the full Magistrates’ Court procedure, except that the passenger would be given an opportunity to enter a plea in the Magistrates’ Court. If the passenger pleads guilty or does not enter a plea, the magistrates would follow a procedure to determine whether to hear (retain) the case or remit to Crown Court. If the case is retained, then a Magistrates’ Court trial would be held, resulting in acquittal or conviction. If the case is remitted, a Crown Court trial would follow, resulting in an acquittal or Crown Court conviction.

Figure S1: Invalid or no ticket - frontline options, routes and outcomes (ScotRail)

A flowchart showing the frontline options, routes and outcomes for ScotRail where a passenger is found on a train or at a station with no ticket or an invalid ticket. Please note this is an indicative illustration and not reflective of all procedural possibilities. Frontline options include: OPTION 1: Discretion applied, for example the passenger is able to argue their position. No further action. OPTION 2: Passenger is sold a ticket or excess fare (the difference between what was paid and the journey). No further action. OPTION 3: If deliberate fare evasion is suspected, revenue protection team and managers may issue an unpaid fare notice (UFN) requiring the passenger to pay the cost of the ticket plus a £30 admin fee. OPTION 4: Passenger may be issued a ticket irregularity notice if they will not or cannot pay. The notice is for the cost of the ticket, incurring a £30 admin fee if unpaid within 21 days. OPTION 5: A passenger may be referred to the British Transport Police (BTP) for prosecution for a fare evasion offence. Note that private prosecutions are unusual in Scotland and charges for fare evasion are normally brought by BTP If a passenger is issued a UFN or ticket irregularity notice and the outstanding fare and any admin fees are paid, then no further action is taken. Otherwise, the TOC decides whether to pursue as a civil or criminal matter. If the TOC decides to pursue as a civil matter, the TOC may take civil debt action or enforcement action through the Sherrif court. If the TOC decides to pursue as a criminal matter, a referral to British Transport Police is made. This may result in no charge (no further action) or a criminal charge initiating a criminal prosecution. If the passenger has been charged, a criminal prosecution process will be followed via the courts. Outcomes include the operator withdrawing the charges in response to pre-trial mitigation or new evidence; an out-of-court settlement in which the passenger pays a settlement in exchange for the TOC dropping charges; an acquittal (not guilty or not proven) following a criminal hearing or a criminal conviction, for example following a guilty plea or trial.

Figure S2: Prosecution process (Scotland)

A flow chart illustrating the prosecution process in Scotland. Please note this is an indicative illustration and not reflective of all procedural possibilities. Private prosecutions are unusual in Scotland and charges are normally brought by British Transport Police (BTP). If no charges are brough then no further action will be taken. A BTP charge initiates a criminal prosecution. Charges may be for a byelaw offence (no intent), a summary offence only. Note: while Railway Byelaw offences do apply in Scotland and may be charged by BTP, in practice it is uncommon for BTP to charge byelaw offences for fare evasion. Charges may instead be brought for RoRA Section 5(1) (no intent) and RoRA Section 5(3) (intent), which are also summary offences. Alternatively, a charge may be brought for the common law offence of fraud. After a charge is brought, the TOC may decide to withdraw the charges and take no further action. If charges are not withdrawn, the case would progress to a hearing in the Sheriff Court, where the defendant may plead guilty and be convicted (in which case there is not right of appeal) or not guilty. If a defendant pleads not guilty, the case would progress to trial. The trial may result in a finding of not guilty (acquittal or not proven), or the passenger may be convicted.