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.
I was using my girlfriends student oyster card to get discounted travel. Oops. Got caught. Tried to lie and said it was a mistake. Then sent me a letter and I told them that it wasn't a mistake and I was sorry. Then they sent me a summons to court. ****. They are saying that "i did not have a valid ticket for travel on that day and that i was intending to avoid payment of the said fare". It also says tfl are claiming £100 to cover costs and £4 for the ticket. Does anyone know if there will be a fine as well or is this £104 all? I am not going to court and will let it all happen in my absence and have told them that i accept the charges and am guilty as sin.
Strangely enough it doesn't mention that I could have been using the disounted oystercard for a longer period of time. It looks like they are only "getting me" for this one journey.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Hi matthew
Firstly, I think it would be in your best interests to attend court. If you can apologise to the judge and state any mitigating circumstances, they may well be more lenient on you.
Were you issued a penalty ticket first? It sounds to me as if they've decided to make an example of you - unfortunately, this could potentially result in a criminal record and £1000 fine, so it really would be best to attend court.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Hi just posted a thread on here about fare on the underground :
HELP! I had been taking steroids to help with my illness and these caused numerous side effects. I had not been out for nearly 6 weeks when I went out to celebrate it. I knew I was going to be late as I had been sleeping for most of the day and didn't think so I just grabbed my mother's freedom Oyster card. An inspector stopped me at the entrance and asked questions. In my state of mind and being impatient to be there on time I just said 'yes' to his questions even though one or two of them weren't correct. My solicitor and even my doctor to wrote to them to explain the side effects I had due to the medication but they still issued me with a summon. My doctor wrote another letter to see if they could settle out of court but they seemed to ignore it so now I have to attend the hearing next Monday. I need to enter my plea. Can anyone suggest what I should do. Does it mean I get a criminal record if I plead guilty (with mitigating circumstances) or should I not plea guilty and get my solicitor to argue it? I cannot afford a criminal record with my work in education.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
If you elect to plead "not guilty", then you don't have to offer any defence but I believe the procesution has to prove "mens rea" - guilty mind. I suspect this is very difficult to show unless you incriminate yourself in some way but they may be very adept at it these days if a lot of people have successfully fought the case.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
As it seems that it is too late to plead guilty out of court, you will now have to attend.
If you don't attend you will be tried in your absence based on what you said to the inspector at the time. If you go to court you can cross examine the inspector (who will more then likely not be in court), you can also claim the mitigating circumstances such as your medicines/jobless/etc.
TfL will not be expecting you to turn up, as they tend to allow 10mins per case and book a whole day in court. The longer you take in questioning the less other cases they can deal with.
They can only claim reasonable costs, which is around £100 regardless of if you turn up in court take 4hrs or don't turn up and it takes 10mins.
Fines depending on court can be around 50-250. The maximum is £1k but I have never ever know someone getting anything above 300 for purely fare evasion. I have known someone get 550, but that was mostly for swearing.
If you are unemployed, tell the magistrate, this can often reduce your fine. Ask for a statement of means, this means that you do an income/loss account and show the court that you can only afford £1 a week etc.
Let us all know how it goes on the day. I suggest you take a friend along with you as courts can be pretty daunting places. I remember my first day as an inspector and it was daunting. Now I go regularly due to work.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Well got a conditional discharge and was just asked to pay the court fee. Though should not have pleaded guilty. Anyway my employer was most supportive when I told them. They thought TFL is a bit of an ass and that the whole country's gone crazy with court proceedings etc and criminalizing all.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Hi everyone, first time user...
My daughter just got a summons letter about a bus fare evasion in July. Although she admitted straight away not having swipped her oyster card I do not understand why, as she admitted the offence,she was not offered to pay for the penalty fee for first time offence??? WHAT KIND OF SOCIETY IS THIS?? I wander if this is acceptable by the EUROPEAN COURT ? does any one knows ??
make sure you read any statements made on the court summons. Check whether you have signed it or not. If you haven't then it will easier to get out of it. Look for discrepancies, the TFL inspector may have surmised what you have said, or might not have written down what you said at all.
Finally check the PACE act 1984 which states: "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.” Followed by you are not under arrested nor obliged to stay behind to answer questions.
If these guidelines have not been followed properly then:anything obtained from you from that point onwards is unfair and should be excluded under s 78 PACE. As funkyparott mentioned earlier you could then state: I believe any confession obtained without the PACE guidelines being followed makes any such confession inadmissable in a court of law.
oh and also, if you were unfortunate enough to still end up in court you will get unrecognisable criminal record, that is you will not have to state this when applying for jobs etc. EXCEPT if you are in specific professions such as teaching, law and I think accounting (not sure abt the last one).
Hope this helps.
I am in touch with TFl atm, hoping they will drop my case and settle out of court. fingers crossed.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
In relation to PACE, only police officers can be held to account if they do not follow the procedures exactly, all other 'persons charged with the investigation of offences' such as ticket inspectors, council enforcement officers etc are given a certain degree of leeway.
Most offences committed on buses,the tube or trains are strict liability and do not require mens rea to be proven.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Originally Posted by SRPO
In relation to PACE, only police officers can be held to account if they do not follow the procedures exactly, all other 'persons charged with the investigation of offences' such as ticket inspectors, council enforcement officers etc are given a certain degree of leeway.
Most offences committed on buses,the tube or trains are strict liability and do not require mens rea to be proven.
Yes you are right however, In the TFL revenue-enforcement and prosecution policy under section 11.1 it states: "tfl revenue inspectors will "caution" any suspect in accordance with the PACE act 1984." http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ons-policy.pdf
I understand they are allowed to some extent change the wording of the PACE act but the message must be pretty clear and if not you can use that as an argument to suggest to TFL that it would be inadmissible in a court of law. If would unfair for tfl to trigger a guilty plea from you without having informed you about your rights beforehand.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
You miss the point, in law , as they are not police officers if they make an error it doesnt automatically disqualify the evidence.
Remember also that the S9 statement is only used to prove in absence, in a trial the officer will give oral evidence, usually the key part is whats said before Caution.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
SPRO - apologies for the confusion but I don't understand this point either. If there is a trail and the officer is present he will submit his testimony verbally.
However if the defendant was says the caution was not given/given at the end of questioning/not fully given, can this not be used to argue that the evidence may be dismissed?
Also say the evidence is dismissed, what else can be used against you? The journey history of the oyster? Further questioning in the trail?
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Bearing in mind that the vast majority of statements are written pro forma, it would be very difficult to argue that the caution was not given or given incorrectly unless the officer concerned admitted the error.
If the evidence was dismissed, it could still be possible to proceed with the case using only the pre caution evidence which is usually enough anyway.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Hi, yes the Pace argument on my site isn't very clear and has lead to some confusion, I posted it when I had a vague idea about the law of evidence, which is now something I have looked further into.
The caution which is found at 10.5 Code C Codes of Practice issued with PACE 1984. Is
“You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”
And as mentioned before
In the TFL revenue-enforcement and prosecution policy under section 11.1 it states: "tfl revenue inspectors will "caution" any suspect in accordance with the PACE act 1984."
Of course there is the exception of things said or done under the common found a R v Christie - but that is going slightly deeper than I think most people should go.
The basis of the PACE argument is to get TFL to settle. I should really re-write the passage in my post, as some people have claimed that they weren't entitled to a solicitor when they were stopped so this obviously raises s. 78 of PACE to exclude the evidence, which it doesnt, s 58 the right to consult a solicitor, only applies when you are custody at a police station.
Its much easier to ring up and ask to settle out of court than to write an argument and get the PACE argument wrong.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Hi All
As a first timer, caught for using my dad's oyster card. When initially asked I panicked as there were lots of police and sniffer dogs around in the tube station and gave a false name out of stupidity. The inspector immediately checked the details against the police PDA and proved it wrong. Then I gave my correct details but that was too late.
Then the usuals. Got a letter for which I promptly replied. then the summons. The prosecution team were not convinced with my mitigating exceptional circumstances (I quoted that I will lose my job, mortgage, family etc.) but they are sticking to their stands.
Since my case is weak (as I did a blunder), I am thinking of pleading guilty. I want to know 2 things:
1. Is there any advantage of using a solicitor if I know that my case is not that strong ?
2. Can going to court have some advantages (like I can apologise, show how I have spent thousands of pounds every year on travel, my employment and family scenarios) ?
Thanks in advance. Any help would be much appreciated.
Re: Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Originally Posted by SRPO
In my experience it is always a good idea to attend court, the magistrates have the ability to impose conditional discharge instead of a fine if they are inclined, but only if the defendant is present.
Personally, I believe that you should only plead guilty if you truly believe you are.
Thanks for your response. Since I have never been to a court, can you please advice on how I should present myself to the magistrate ? Would appearing remorseful and regretful help (to reduce the sentence/fine) ?
Avoiding fare on london underground - summons!!!!
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by SRPO
