What we know as 28,000 Northern Rail fare evasion prosecutions thrown out
Northern Rail brought 28,631 prosecutions against passengers using the controversial Single Justice Procedure.
Tens of thousands of Northern Rail passengers have had their convictions for rail evasion overturned after a judge ruled they were not lawful.
Northern Rail, which covers large swathes of northern England, brought 28,631 prosecutions against passengers using the controversial single justice procedure (SJP) between 6 August 2020 and 21 May 2024, despite not being permitted to do so.
Meanwhile, TransPennine Express, which operates in the north of England and Scotland, brought 41 prosecutions between 1 January 2024 and 22 January 2024.
They were declared a nullity by chief magistrate Paul Goldspring during a two-minute hearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Thursday.
Northern Rail welcomed Thursday’s outcome and apologised for the “errors”.
A spokesman said: “Customers affected by the issues raised in court will be contacted directly by HM Courts and Tribunal Service. We are unable to respond to individual queries at this time.
“Northern remains committed to ensuring that all our customers are treated fairly, which means ensuring all passengers who board our trains have a valid ticket.”
It comes after Golding ruled in August that the passengers of seven train companies would be refunded for their convictions.
The judge said at the time that the Courts Service, the Department for Transport and the train operating companies would work to identify those affected, and that “a team will be put in place to begin the work of recovering the money paid and refund the money to individuals” by November.
In June this year, Goldspring said those convictions were “probably unlawful”, with lawyers for rail companies telling a further hearing last month they were “in agreement” the prosecutions should be thrown out.
What are the punishments for fare evasion?
Fare evasion on trains is considered a serious offence, and there are several different consequences for those caught avoiding payment.
The most common penalty is a fixed penalty notice (FPN), which typically carries a fine of £100 plus the price of a single fare for the journey. This is reduced to £50 plus the fare if paid within 21 days. If the fine is not settled, the offender may face prosecution and higher fines.
In more serious cases, especially where repeat offenders are involved or where evasion is deemed deliberate and significant, the penalty can escalate to a court summons – which can lead to a criminal conviction and a fine of up to £1,000, along with a potential criminal record.
In addition to financial penalties, fare evaders may also face compensation claims for any unpaid fares, which could include the full cost of the journey along with additional fees.
For those who provide false information or try to deceive inspectors, there can be further legal repercussions. Rail companies also retain the right to ban individuals from specific services or networks.
Why is this ruling so significant?
Judge Goldspring’s ruling in August that thousands of convictions were void meant that that seven train companies – including Northern Rail and Greater Anglia – faced paying out millions of pounds in refunds.
He said at the time that six “test cases” should be declared “void”, adding that the cases of thousands of other cases would be dealt with in the same way over the coming months.
Goldspring said “over 74,000” people is a “best guess at the moment”, regarding the number of people in total who would have their convictions overturned.
In his ruling, the judge declared the test cases a “nullity”, so it was “as if as though the proceedings never existed”.
Following the ruling, the Ministry of Justice, the Courts and Tribunals Service and the Department for Transport said that those affected by the ruling were prosecuted by one of the seven companies between 2018 and 2023, with the “vast majority” of cases prosecuted from 2020, under either section 5(1) or section 5(3) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889.
The ruling relates to the use of the SJP – and it could spark a wave of quashed convictions for those who may have been unlawfully prosecuted under the system. It also paves the way for a debate on whether the SJP should be scrapped entirely.
What is a single justice procedure?
Set up in 2015, the single justice procedure (SJP) enables magistrates to decide on minor offences, such as using a TV without a licence or driving without car insurance, without defendants going to court.
Under this procedure, cases are decided by a single magistrate without the need for a court hearing, and typically, the defendant is not present.
Instead, they are sent a summons in the form of a letter, which they can choose to respond to or ignore. If the defendant fails to respond, a conviction can be issued in their absence, often resulting in a fine or other penalties.
Rail companies were permitted to use the SJP in 2016 to privately prosecute fare evaders, but many have been brought under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which is not allowed under the procedure.
While the SJP is designed to streamline the justice process, it has drawn criticism for its lack of transparency and potential for injustice.
One of the main concerns is that individuals may not even be aware that a case has been brought against them, as it can be processed without them being present or informed in a timely manner.
As a result, people can find themselves unknowingly convicted of an offence and subjected to financial penalties or a criminal record without having had the chance to properly defend themselves.
If a defendant is not aware of the proceedings, they can make a declaration to that effect, which voids the proceedings and allows them to start again.
A “significant proportion” of magistrates also said they do not always have sufficient time to “properly consider each case”.
This has raised significant concerns about fairness, especially for vulnerable individuals who may not fully understand the process or may not have the resources to respond adequately.
Following Thursday’s ruling, Richard Atkinson, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, told Yahoo News UK: “We welcome the government’s commitment to review the single justice procedure as we are aware concerns have been raised for some time about how fairly the fast-track system operates, particularly in regard to vulnerable people.”
Could more people be affected?
While not definite, it is likely that more people could have their prosecutions quashed, with further hearings due to take place regarding thousands of other train fare prosecutions.
Affected cases were also prosecuted by Avanti West Coast, Greater Anglia, Great Western Railway, Arriva Rail Northern, Merseyrail and C2C, the Courts and Tribunals Service said.
Earlier this month the government also ordered an independent review of rail fare prosecutions and enforcement.
Transport secretary Louise Haigh announced that regulator the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) will analyse how suspected fare evasion is handled. This will include an assessment of whether ticketing terms and conditions are clear for passengers, and when prosecution is appropriate.
Meanwhile, the government has said it is open to “fundamentally reforming” the fast-track SJP court process.
Justice minister Heidi Alexander said she will not accept improper usage of the SJP and has asked for the notices to be redesigned.
Read more
