Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, Hotpoint UK has been a subsidiary of Whirlpool for over 20 years. And unlike some domestic goods manufacturers you can buy from them direct and I believe they employ their own service engineers, Is that your situation? You bought direct from Hotpoint and Hotpoint sent out their own engineer?
    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

South West Trains - Possible Criminal Record?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4229 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if anyone can help.

 

A few months ago I was approached by authority working on behalf of Southwest Trains. They cautioned me and i had to give a statement. I had a child weeks travelcard which i used at Waterloo, the barrier didnt let me through because it was a child ticket so i used my oyster card to get through - the officer must have been watching) I said that i could not afford the full fair hence the child ticket. He took my statement for each of the 5or 6 days of travel of which it was used and took the tickets in quesiton, i guess for evidence.

 

As he questioned me I was quite upset and wasnt thinking too clearly. Not far a reflection on how I had felt the entire month due to physical illness and bouts of depression. So I cant remember much detail of my statement further than I have just given.

 

I have now recieved a letter from SWT stating that 'the evidence given was being considered as to whether legal proceedings are appropriate If you consider that tehere are further mitigating factors taht may influence any decision that may be made about this matter you are invited to respond, in writing only, within 14days of the letter'.

 

To be honest I wasnt thinking clearly when I bought the ticket, I dont know if retracting the original statement would help avoid prosecution? My depressed state left me not caring much for life itself really, I was in debt and had been at my new job for about 6 months at this point. In fact I was hoping to get a train fare loan from work but i had to pass probation (6months) to get it.

 

Anyway I have some old weekly adult tickets that i used, and I know have an annual train ticket on loan from work. I will also see my doctor if i need the evidence.

 

I am a 29yr old female, I finished uni in 2007, 2 years of which include deferring a year and repeating a year due to depressiona and ill health. This is my second and most promising permanent job, of which i had been unemployed for months so its very important to me and with a criminal record i feel it will ruin it all for me as I may need to travel abroad for work soon too.

 

I'm very worried and would really appreciate any help or advice you can give. I have no idea what to do. I already feel my life slipping out of my hands again, I will definitley see the doctor firstly but I'm very worried as I still live at home with my parents which is also a rocky situation.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that using a child season ticket at the age of 29 will not be taken lightly by either SWT or the courts, it's this kind of activity that partly contributes to fare rises. I think you need to face up to the fact that you were in the wrong and offer to settle out of court with SWT if they agree to do so, which they don't have to. As for retracting the facts of the original interview, i very much doubt that you could do this without going to court adn even then, there is enough evidence of the offence simply by the fact that you were using the child rate ticket at the age of 29! Not having enough money is not an excuse! If you don't have enough money for Tesco finest steak do you take it anyway and just pay the price of Tesco value steak? I doubt it! It sounds harsh but stop hiding behind excuses and face up to it, all I can say is to either settle out of court OR attend court and use your circumstances as mitigation to get any sentence reduced.

Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, RPI is spot-on.

 

This is a serious matter. Purchasing a Child-Rate season ticket and using it over a number of days shows clear, pre-meditated intent to avoid payment of the correct fares due.

 

Attempting to re-tract your original statement is not going to alter the evidence.

 

Your best chance is to write a very apologetic letter to the TOC, but your declared financial position does not seem as if it is going to help you much in this case. You may write and ask the company to consider allowing you to settle this out of Court by making payment of all the unpaid fares and the reasonable costs incurred by the company in dealing with this, but if they were to agree this would have to be paid in full and immediately. The TOCs are unable to take payment in small increments in these cases.

 

In honesty, I very much doubt that they will agree to settle out of Court, but you never know. You may get lucky.

 

I have some sympathy with your plight, times are hard for a very great many people, but setting out to avoid paying your proper fares in this way cannot ever be condoned. There is no escaping the fact that it is a criminal act.

 

I know it is not what you want to hear, but your best course of action, if the TOC reject an offer of settlement, is to plead guilty as soon as you receive a summons, attend Court and say 'sorry' in person and undertake never to repeat the offence. Make sure that you take with you evidence of your debts and your income and outgoings. You will need to complete a 'Statement of means' (Form MC100).

 

The charge is likely to be 'intent to avoid a fare contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act (1889)'. If this is a first offence you will be likely to face a fine (on Level 3 of the standard scale) and this can be up to a maximum of £1000, but this will not be applied in full in a first offence and credit will be given for an early guilty plea. In practice, the Magistrates will normally start with a fine equal to the estimated average national weekly wage (£400) and will reduce that by giving credit for the early guilty plea. They will probably order you to pay the costs of the prosecution (usually between £100 - £200) and may reduce that because of your means. They will also usually order payment of the fares that have been avoided in compensation to the rail company and are required to order a £15.00 victim surcharge imposed on all persons who are fined by the Court.

 

In these situations it is best to face up to your responsibilities, attend Court and say sorry in person. This will attract the maximum credit that the Magistrates can give.

 

It is a hard lesson, but it is not life threatening, try not to worry about it and learn from the experience. Sorry if you think it sounds like preaching, but I really do hope that you can move on from this positively.

 

If you are ordered to pay fines etc., you will be given time to pay by instalments, which will be set at an affordable level based on your earnings etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your responses, I really appreciate your honest opinions and advice.

 

Although this may not be life threatening I had no idea of how this would impact my future, should I get a criminal record. I will probably have to go abroad for work and I may end up losing my job should I not be able to do this. I also planned to some day work with children. I do understand the severity of the situation I've put myself in and will definitely apologise for my stupid actions I just dont know what I'll do with my life if I lose my job AND cant work with children.

 

In terms of evidence, I do have old tickets and had purchesed an annual ticket which I was able to acquire after my probation period at work through the loan scheme. I can also have my doctor write a letter of evidence to supposrt my medical conditions. Do you think this will suffice, along with your previous suggestions?

 

Thanks again :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be perfectly honest, old tickets do not count for much in the scheme of things because the Court is only concerned with the offence.

 

Nonetheless, if you photo-copy these and send a copy with your letter to the rail company, explain that in the past you had always purchased valid, full fare ticket and show the evidence of your newly acquired annual season ticket through successfully completing your probation period too it may help.

 

Explain that your foolish action was as a result of a desperate need to get to and from work during a period of short-term financial stress and that you are genuinely remorseful. Yes, a letter from your GP may help too.

 

It is likely that they will still proceed to issue a summons, but you lose nothing by trying to get them to settle out of court.

 

Let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If convicted by a Court, yes. The scenario described by your original post will lead to a charge of 'intent to avoid a fare'

 

That said, this is an offence at the lower end of the scale of offending and will not normally have a truly detrimental effect on your future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really grateful for your responses Old Codja

 

Just to clarify, when you say not truly detrimental do you mean it wont show up on a CRB check? I would be able to travel abroad for work?

 

Also I think I read on this forum that there is a useful template for writing such letters?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really grateful for your responses Old Codja

 

Just to clarify, when you say not truly detrimental do you mean it wont show up on a CRB check? I would be able to travel abroad for work?

 

If convicted of a the offence of intending to avoid a fare contrary to S.5 of The Regulation of Railways Act this frequently only shows up on an enhanced check of CRB.

 

If it happens you would be wise to declare it to an employer, but in the wider measure of offending, it is not a very serious offence of dishonesty. I very much doubt that it would prevent you from travelling, it is only those whose employment calls for a very high level of integrity (Police, Lawyer etc.) that will normally have a problem if convicted of this offence.

Edited by Old-CodJA
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I think I read on this forum that there is a useful template for writing such letters?

 

Hello again.

 

I don't think there is a template here, because everyone's case is different.

 

Hopefully the guys will give you an idea of what you need to mention, but it might look better if the letter is in your own words and sounds sincere, rather than being copied and pasted. Amongst other things, I understand you certainly need to express remorse and undertake never to do anything similar again. And you can put in any mitigating factors which led to this happening.

 

I hope you'll have more input later from the guys in the know.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses.

 

The reason I asked about the effect of the conviction on travelling is because I read on this forum that it would have a detrimental outcome for those who travel abroad often esp to the US? That would be something that would affect me so I was worried.

 

Also would it affect someone who wanted to adopt or work with children?

 

Thanks, HB I agree I don't really need a template as I've just written everything as honestly as I can.

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Oh yes, is it that obvious?! It's a pretty similar story so I didn't bother to start a new thread. Was just interested to see outcomes. With that in mind I will start a new thread at some point, but I'm currently waiting for SWT's response to my grovelling letter of apology, so will need advice if they still want to proceed to court! Thank you all for support though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If convicted of a the offence of intending to avoid a fare contrary to S.5 of The Regulation of Railways Act this frequently only shows up on an enhanced check of CRB.

 

Hi Old-CodJA,Could I just ask you to confirm this as I thought other threads had stated that only the bylaw breaches would show on an enhanced check and that a conviction under the RRA would always show on a standard crb check?I may be getting confused though!! ThanksRobert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Old-CodJA,Could I just ask you to confirm this as I thought other threads had stated that only the bylaw breaches would show on an enhanced check and that a conviction under the RRA would always show on a standard crb check?I may be getting confused though!! ThanksRobert

 

Whilst a conviction for 'fare evasion contrary to S.5.3.a of RoRA', if loaded to PNC should always show up, it is a fact of life that it frequently doesn't.

 

Whether that has something to do with the input process or not I have no idea I'm afraid. The fact is that it seems the process is not nationally consistent yet, although it ought to be.

 

A conviction for the strict liability offence of a breach of Byelaw is not recordable and only a 'record of conviction' exists with the Court. This may show up on a very detailed check.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi All,

 

Thanks so much for your help.

 

As I'd mentioned I sent my letter stating everything that resulted in my purchase of the child ticket. Their response was that they didnt see that it necessarily relevant to explain my health and financial situation. it was a very stern letter as expected however they said they saw that I may have learnt my lesson.

 

I had enclosed a letter from my GP explaining how my health had been and the help I was trying to receive to get better. I also enclosed the annual ticket i'd bought after the probation period at work to prove that I didnt plan on doing it ever again. I then had to pay the fine of £300 incl. admin fees etc.

 

A severe relief and thanks again for all your advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...