Penalty Fare - History and Legal Status

History and Legal Status

Penalty fares were first introduced on British Rail Network SouthEast under the British Rail (Penalty Fares) Act 1989. Over time they have been extended to cover many parts of the National Rail network.

The London Regional Transport (Penalty Fares) Act 1992 and the Greater London Authority Act 1999 allows Transport for London to charge penalty fares under similar but not identical rules. TfL's penalty fares scheme covers buses and trams as well as the London Underground and Docklands Light Railway.

Initially the maximum penalty fare was set at £10 (£5 on buses & trams) or twice the full single fare to the next station (whichever is the highest) in addition to the full single fare for the rest of the journey. This was later raised to £20 for all transport modes. As of 11 January 2009, this has been further raised to £50 (on London Underground/Overground/Buses/Trams and DLR only), although like many other civil penalties in the UK, a 50% discount is applied for early payments.

Penalty fares on the National Rail network are legally based on section 130 of the Railways Act 1993. The rules which govern the application of penalty fares are the Penalty Fares Rules 2002. Under these rules any passenger found to be without a valid ticket can be issued a penalty fare irrespective of whether it was their intent to travel without paying. The few exceptions to this include the inability of the passenger to buy a ticket due to no services being available at the boarding station.

The legality of penalty fares on the National Rail network has been questioned as they are not legally enforcable without a court order.

Penalty Fares on buses and trains in Northern Ireland are applied in accordance with regulations made under the Transport Act (Northern Ireland) 1967.

Read more about this topic:  Penalty Fare

Famous quotes containing the words history, legal and/or status:

    The history is always the same the product is always different and the history interests more than the product. More, that is, more. Yes. But if the product was not different the history which is the same would not be more interesting.
    Gertrude Stein (1874–1946)

    Hawkins: The will is not exactly in proper legal phraseology. Richard: No: my father died without the consolations of the law.
    George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950)

    Knowing how beleaguered working mothers truly are—knowing because I am one of them—I am still amazed at how one need only say “I work” to be forgiven all expectation, to be assigned almost a handicapped status that no decent human being would burden further with demands. “I work” has become the universally accepted excuse, invoked as an all-purpose explanation for bowing out, not participating, letting others down, or otherwise behaving inexcusably.
    Melinda M. Marshall (20th century)