.png)
4 hours ago
1
Daisy Mumba didn’t think her train journey from Reading to Sheffield could get any worse. Seven months pregnant and unable to get to the seat she had booked because of the number of people onboard, she had to sit on the floor, constantly getting up and down to let other passengers past.
But worse it was to get. A seemingly minor error to do with printing out her ticket prompted a series of calamitous events and left her with a conviction for not having a valid ticket, even though she had spent £70 on one before the journey.
Her experience is a salutary lesson for anyone who relies too much on the advances of technology, and a reminder that not all parts of the transport system operate seamlessly in the digital age.
The 32-year-old teacher from Sheffield had been returning from a wedding last August when she bought a ticket from Slough to Sheffield, with a change in Reading, on the Trainline app. Her first problem, she says, was that she could not get to her seat and had to sit on the floor next to the toilet on the CrossCountry service.
When a ticket inspector arrived to check her ticket, Mumba showed her what she thought was her ticket on the Trainline app but was told it was not valid as she needed to have it printed out. “I showed her my ticket on the app and she told me it wasn’t valid. I have used the app for over a decade and have never been asked to do this,” says Mumba.
She went to the ticket office in Sheffield and got it printed out, as she says she was instructed to do, and thought little more of it.
That was until she got a court notification for boarding a train without a valid ticket.
“I filled out the attached paperwork and pled not guilty, attaching a photo of the physical ticket, a screenshot of the online ticket via the Trainline app and a screenshot of the purchase on my HSBC bank statement,” she says.
The letter with the evidence never got to court – she presumes it must have got lost in transit – and Mumba was found guilty in her absence, with the court recording a conviction and fining her £600.
Her experience arguably shows how a simple mistake can snowball into something beyond one’s control.
Mumba’s main problem was that she had bought a ticket that required her to physically print it out before boarding and show that to the ticket inspector. On CrossCountry’s website, it says that “for most of our journeys, there’s absolutely no need for paper tickets”. However, that was not the case in this instance.
Trainline says some tickets are not required to be printed, such as e-tickets and tap-in/tap-out tickets. But on the service that Mumba travelled on, e-tickets, which use barcodes on mobile devices instead of requiring a paper ticket, were not available, according to the company.
After her mistake, CrossCountry says it wrote to her to ask for evidence of having had a ticket for the journey. But she says the only letter she got was notifying her of the prosecution. And after the evidence she sent went missing, the next she heard was of a fine being handed down at Northampton magistrates court.
CrossCountry says it cannot accept proof of purchase, or a booking reference, as a customer could claim a refund for the ticket if it is not printed out. “We’re sorry that Ms Mumba’s journey between Reading and Sheffield was affected by overcrowding. However, no matter how busy a service might be, it remains a legal requirement for passengers to possess a valid ticket prior to boarding rail services. This ensures full and correct revenue collection and helps to tackle fraud by preventing the refund of an unscanned ticket, which is a significant issue for train operators,” said the company.
Trainline, which is a private sector ticket operator, says Mumba was told she needed to collect the ticket and that e-tickets were not available on that journey. It says e-tickets are used on a large percentage of National Rail journeys, but otherwise passengers must collect a paper ticket.
After the Observer’s intervention, CrossCountry said it would tell the court, at the next hearing, that the issue can be dismissed – which should overturn her conviction and fine. “Though we’re now working with our prosecutors to withdraw Ms Mumba’s case, her story highlights how important it is for those in similar situations to engage with prosecutors to prevent the significant personal stress of a court summons, and to avoid wasting the limited time of the courts,” said the company.
“We’d ask anyone travelling by train to double-check their tickets – including the journey details, ticket type and ticket format – before travelling to avoid such a challenging set of circumstances.”
For Mumba, the case is one of unnecessary stress brought about by a mixture of confusion and events outside her control, which could have ended up with her facing the prospect of prison if she had not paid her fine.
“I am not a criminal, nor am I in the wrong, as I have all the evidence to support the purchase of the ticket. I am also terrified of the prospect of having a criminal record, as I am a teacher and will struggle to work with a criminal record,” she says.
