Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Hi can anyone offer some advice please.
In July my son was given a caution on a train for having his foot on a seat. he suffers from really bad arthritis and it was 6.60 in the morning. nothing had been heard since but last week he received a letter from the court stating he is being prosecuted for the offense.
Yes, thats the one, why they pick on non-trouble causing ppl is beyond me, fair enough ppl shouldn't put feet up on seats, but bl**dy *ell since when has it been an offence serious enough for court proceedings, we aren't going forward in time, we're going backwards. These "Jobs-worths" really p*ss me off, they make matters worse, they should be going after the real criminals, or is it that they can only handle the ppl who commit the serious crime of feet on seats.
Please don't forget to keep us posted on how he gets on.
Its pathetic!
But the poor old bobbies (transport or otherwise) have to keep the solved crime figures up! After all, you can get a lot of snoozing commuters in one go - its even easier (and cheaper) than having to go out and do all those speeding motorists!
And all the fines they collect will be spent on upgrading our transport system - won't they?
Pen..all joking aside now. Can you get a 'doctors letter' verifying that your son has athritis & that elevating his limbs alleviates the condition? Most doctors charge around £16 or so but in the end it is worth it as it goes a long way in mitigation.
hi Everyone. I was honestly shocked to be honest when he called me to say he had just been cautioned. He told me the officer had a camara on his head. I was straight on the phone to the police to complain as you can never get one by us if you needed them.
They told me it would be the transport police who would have given it not them, the officer was quite shocked to be honest.
Yes my son can get a letter from his doctor.
but he would not beable to afford a solicitor
He is a good kid and never any trouble. He had just got himself a job in chester for the summer holidays and was spending 3 hours a day travelling for a pittance. Had the officer said to him put his feet down he would have done so. but then if he was a 6ft thug the officer would not have said a word to him. It does make you wonder.
My problem is i will be away when he has to attend court and he will be useless defending himself. He will just except whatever the court throw at him. He's not streetwise at all.
i will check out those sites you have kindly supplied me with and keep you all informed.
Cheers
Pen
He should be able to get legal aid I would think, try 'The Law Centre' in your area. Failing that, there will be a 'Duty Solicitor' in the court who he can ask for assistance (free), if he asks at reception they'll direct him.
cerbert, good idea. I forgot about that. I suppose I will have to do a witness statement for him!!!!.
I have just read the TPs statement. the conversation between him and my some word for word. my so was really polite according to TPs statement. apparently there was a staement made over then tannoy but because my son had his headphones on with his Ipod plus half a sleep he did not hear it. also the TP did not warn him or even asked him to take his feet off which my son done as soon as he approched him,he just cautioned him and that was it. If it had been me to be honest I would not have given him my name or address but thats me, I suppose I brought my kids up better lol
anyway we will definity get the medical letter and I will write up a WS for him to give to the duty solicitor. on reading the link in the first post it was the same train, Chester
thanks everyone.
To be perfectly honest, this prosecution is at the bottom of the pile in the scheme of things OK, your son committed a summary offence by breaking a BR bye-law. IMHO the Magistrates have far more pressing matters to consider & if your son presents a GP's letter showing that he has a medical condition which necessitates him 'elevating' his legs, they will see it as just that
In the unlikely event that he doesn't get an 'Absolute Discharge', the most he can expect is a small fine.
Under the 'Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974' the conviction is considered spent after 5 years (two & a half if the offender is under 18) & doesn't have to be disclosed unless he applies for one of the following;
Accountants
Chiropractor
Dealer in securities
Dentists, dental hygienist or dental auxiliary
Director, controller, etc. of insurance company or building society
Firearms dealers
Judicial appointments
Justices' Chief Executives, Justices' Clerks and assistants
Nurses and midwives
Opticians
Osteopath
Pharmaceutical chemists
Police constables
Prison board of visitors
Prison officers
Probation officers
Teachers
Traffic wardens
Lawyers
Veterinary surgeons
Manager or trustees of unit trust
Medical practitioners.
Other excepted occupations include:
• Any office or employment where the question about spent convictions is asked for the purpose of safeguarding national security - for example, if you wish to be employed by the UK Atomic Energy Authority, the Civil Aviation Authority or as an officer of the Crown.
• Certain types of work in health and social services where the work involves access to people over 65, people suffering from serious illness or mental disorder, alcoholics or drug addicts, blind, deaf or dumb people, persons who are substantially and permanently handicapped by illness, injury or congenital deformity, or where the work is concerned with the provision of care, recreation or leisure facilities, schooling, social services, supervision or training, to people under 18.
• Applications for certain certificates or licences - for example, those for firearms, explosives or gaming - require that your spent convictions must be disclosed and allow the licensing authority to take them into account. Failure to disclose a spent conviction could lead to the refusal or loss of the certificate or licence and even to prosecution.
But the Offence is so trivial I don't think it'll even be considered
The trouble with an absolute discharge is that it is still a conviction. All it means is that technically they are guilty of the offence but the circumstances dictate that it warrants no penalty. It is not the same as case dismissed. (I am an ex cop so have come across this plenty of times) The quote from the case highlighted in an earlier post illustrates this.
Mrs Abrams gave Miss Jennings an absolute discharge, meaning she will not be punished but her criminal offence will be recorded. There were no costs awarded.
I would defend the case with a not guilty plea as a medical reason for a particular act can be an acceptable defence and the worst that can happen is he be found guilty and the circumstances taken into account.
If he accepts the charge and pleads guilty with mitigating circumstances then the best he can hope for is what he would receive in the first scenario.
That being said, it is so trivial that most people will laugh it off but remember, if he goes for employment somewhere and it is raised then some employers may see it as an antisocial act and may brand your son unfairly as a yob because of this.
Fight it, dont dismiss it lightly.
If you enter a not gulty plea then a hearing will be scheduled where the Inspector who questioned you will be called to give evidence.
If they realise you are defending on medical grounds they may drop the case before it even gets to court.
But as you know Magistrates vary in their opinions. in the worse case scenario the bench may conclude that an 'Offence' had been committed albeit there were mitigating circumstances.
Even if an 'Absolute Discharge' were to be delivered, at least that only lasts for 6 months under the Act.
Hi everyone, sorry I have not been on for a while. Belefat I think I have to agree with you and fight the case and ask him to plead not guilty. He has gotten his letter from his GP so hopefully he will be OK fingers crossed. I do not want him to have a caution on his record even if it is laughable, he would still have to declare it if he went for one of the above jobs and anyway I think It was totally unfair of the TP. no warning was given etc . I am just so sorry I will not be able to go to court with him as he is too honest for his own good at times.
Thanks for the help everyone. I will keep you all posted on the out come and advice him to involved the duty solicitor.
i'm I right in thinking if he pleads not guilty then another hearing date will be set or will the case still be heard there and then regardless of his plea.
If he is going to fight this (& I don't blame him), he really needs to have an advocate to speak on his behalf! A solicitor knows the nuonces of court procedure and is better equipped to deal with legal adversaries (particularly police witnesses)
Transport police
Reply With Quote
OK, your son committed a summary offence by breaking a BR bye-law. IMHO the Magistrates have far more pressing matters to consider & if your son presents a GP's letter showing that he has a medical condition which necessitates him 'elevating' his legs, they will see it as just that
