I went through the barriers at Oxford Circus with Grandad's freedom pass (which I used by mistake thinking it was my own ticket - we'd gone out to lunch for my 18th and he gave me his stuff to look after) and got stopped rather aggressively by a Revenue Inspector.

I got the impression that he was the police 'cos he read me my rights. I was sh .... ing myself cos I'm not from London but had heard stories of brutality from the police. This guy was definitely trying to provoke a physical response from me but I kept my cool 'cos I was in a suit.

He questioned me about the freedom ticket and I explained what had happened. He was having none of it. He was so close to my face that he was spraying spit too. I just immediately volunteered to go and get a ticket which I did and after extensive questioning and detaining me, continued my journey.

Next thing I know, I've been charged under s.17(1) TFL Bye law (is this a strict liability offence?) for apparently entering a "compulsory ticket area" without a ticket (I'm not a Londoner and so was pretty shocked by Revenue Inspector's behaviour). He is relying on his statement. I am pleading not guilty because having traced my steps back to Oxford Circus I can't see that it is a compulsory ticket area. My mother is livid and wants to countersue for the guy's behaviour.

What I want to ask is (a) because I bought a ticket before getting on a train does that get me off the hook (b) the RI's statement is a lie - it's as if I've been framed because of the way he's worded it. Is the RI's statement still valid if I haven't signed it? Can I sue him back? Is there any good case law I can use in my defence, please.

Thank you.

Hello and welcome to CAG. The forum guys should be along later with advice for you.

I would park the idea of suing for the moment, until you've dealt with the immediate issue. When you say you've been charged, have you got a court date or is this a letter asking for your version of events please?

My best, HB

By the way, I've moved your thread to the transport forum for specialised advice.

HB

Unfortunately revenue inspectors hear the "I made a mistake" story too many times and that's why they didn't believe you.

I don't think you can sue the inspector because he didn't commit any offence, didn't take any money from you and, despite acting aggressively, he didn't do anything wrong legally.

You could complain to his bosses, but I'm sure that they get lots of complaints from suspected fare evaders who want to get off the hook, so I don't think they'll scrap the prosecution process just for a complaint.

In fact, it could have the opposite effect.

Your best bet would be to write to the prosecution department apologising for your mistake WITHOUT accusing the inspector of any wrongdoing and offer to meet their costs.

Bear in mind that they will look at previous journeys to check that this was or was not a one off mistake.

Freedom passes misuse is considered a serious offence by tocs, however we have had several cases here settled out of court by caggers who wrote a grovelling letter of apology explaining that a criminal record would affect their life massively.

So my advice is to start writing.

To answer your questions, buying a ticket after you were caught does not get you off the hook.

Also, whatever the inspector wrote in his report is irrelevant because you have been charged under a bylaw which is a strict liability offence.

You indeed were in a compulsory ticket area without a valid ticket.

No doubt about that.

Thanks Honeybee

What I've got is a Form headed "Single Justice procedure Notice" and underneath it says "

You have been charged with an offence committed on a Transport for London service as detailed in the attached pack - You now have 21 days to plead either guilty or not guilty to the offence" so I am going to plead "not guilty".

Message to King 12345

Do you know for sure that this is a strict liability offence ? Can you show me where you got that info please? My own research says that it is rare for a s.17 offence to get a criminal record - I'm not paying anything unless absolutely necessary - I have a feeling that you might work for TFL - Has no one heard of proportionality round here ?

Thank you for the information.

AFAIK, king12345 doesn't work for TfL, but I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong. We have rail experts who visit the forum and I'll send a couple of SOSs for you to see if they can get here.

HB

what date was this please

simple begging letter should do ok

dx

All bylaw offences are strict liability, you've either committed it or not.

It would be different if they had used rra section 5 which requires intent to be demonstrated.

Don't know how TfL operates, but I'll look for some threads about freedom passes on TfL resolved with an out of court settlement, I'm sure I've seen a couple.

I know that it's unfair because you have made an honest mistake but unfortunately what is done is done.

Best thing to do is find a solution now.

Others more expert than me will advice in more details.

DX100uk - It happened in May 2016 - why do you ask please?

and to King12345

- I appreciate that so thanks.

I am not just going to pay up cos I'm frightened of the consequences.

I will go to court if I have to and fight for proportionality and quote them their own Policy on how to deal with stuff.

If I could just get a couple of cases (short ones, I hate reading) with the words "honest mistake" (thanks for that)

I might be able to put it forward but there's no way I'm paying a penny on principle

- just think of the tax papers' money that its going to cost for all this.

Glad I'm not paying. Probs going back to oxford circus to see if there are any signs saying "compulsory ticket area"

So if this is a strict liability thing then I only half done it because I honestly believed I had my ticket even tho I didnt, right? Is there a case about that ?

Any other help from anyone would be appreciated

Thanks everyone

you got an original letter asking for your side of the story

did you respond? you should have...

if this was an honest one off mistake

then you should plead guilty by letter to the prosecutions address

and offer to pay any reasonable expenses and equivalent financial sum to a fine

to keep your record clear and your future employment chances clear.

sorry but waving your arms around that you were not treated fairly or whatever wont wash

and could cost you are more than a simple fine in court.

get it sorted by a grovelling letter

you can do that right up until the morning of the court case [iF you persist in being stupid and allowing it to go that far]

then when all is over and done, THEN make a complaint regarding attitudes etc if you then feel its necessary.

dx

Thanks DX for that info - they want £260 !!!

- I will see what the others have to say about it before I make a decision

- but you must admit, it is definitely disproportionate on TFL's part

well no its not sadly.

there are threads here with far greater sums than that.

pay it , move on with your life..

I take it that sum is for an out of court settlement?

Thank DX for your help here.

Well I've never received a letter asking me for my side of the events.

All I've got is this Single Justice Procedure Notice in which it asks me how I plead and gives me a sheet to explain why I am pleading this way.

In that document the RI has made a Witness Statement !!

I thought a Witness Statement had to be signed by me as well?

Any idea ?

Well its a lot of money to an 18 year old whose just left school so I defo not paying and I will put my case forward - its just bullying tactics to get money out of us

if it went to court you would each do a WS.

doesn't matter that it was a genuine mistake

you have broken the byelaws

could cost you more money if it went to court

eitherway you'll get time to pay mind.

as you have not received the initial letter

tell you what i'd do

[but do not use this to complain about their attitude!! - leave that be]

go ring them up and explain you've not received the initial letter asking for your side of the story

and that their settlement is rather impossible for you

they might just reduce it

but do it by phone

you might catch them on the hop

I've heard of that once before

I am not just going to pay up cos I'm frightened of the consequences.

 

I will go to court if I have to and fight for proportionality and quote them their own Policy on how to deal with stuff.

 

If I could just get a couple of cases (short ones, I hate reading) with the words "honest mistake" (thanks for that)

 

I might be able to put it forward but there's no way I'm paying a penny on principle

- just think of the tax papers' money that its going to cost for all this.

 

Glad I'm not paying. Probs going back to oxford circus to see if there are any signs saying "compulsory ticket area"

 

So if this is a strict liability thing then I only half done it because I honestly believed I had my ticket even tho I didnt, right? Is there a case about that ?

 

Any other help from anyone would be appreciated

 

Thanks everyone

"Strict liability" means your intent isn't relevant,

the liability for the offence is determined by "either you did it, or you didn't", not by "you did it, but didn't intend to".

So, "then I only half done it because I honestly believed I had my ticket even tho I didnt, right?" is not correct. Your honest belief would matter if charged with an offence requiring intent, but is irrelevant to the Bylaw offence.

"If I could just get a couple of cases (short ones, I hate reading) with the words "honest mistake" (thanks for that)". Sorry, I didn't bother looking up any further case law beyond that which I'm already aware of. If you aren't going to be bothered to read them, bearing in mind you only want 'short ones', I can't be bothered to look them up!.

"I will go to court if I have to and fight for proportionality and quote them their own Policy on how to deal with stuff.", Yup, with that attitude, you'll be going to court..........

The Magistrates will no doubt listen carefully to your arguments about proportionality, and TFL's policies.

They will then be called up to asses if you are guilty of the offence charged.

To decide that, they will look at the evidence, and decide if you were in a compulsory ticket area without a ticket.

From what you have said, you were.

So, then you'd need to show why you had one of the potential defences to the charge.

If you could show that there was inadequate signage of it being a compulsory ticket arae, you might stand a chance, but I bet you can't.

Your speech on proportionality and TFL's policies won't get considered regarding any verdict.

It could only play a role with the Magistrates regarding mitigation / any penalty they imposed, not if you were guilty or not.

The other way it might be useful is in persuading Tfl not to take it to court, but quoting their rules at them (and your current approach) isn't likely to persuade them not to prosecute ....

"- just think of the tax papers' money that its going to cost for all this.".

I wouldn't worry yourself about the tax payer's money ..

.... if TFL successfully prosecute you (as seems likely),

they can apply for their costs to be added to any fine,

and the court levies a victim surcharge too.

What ticket did you think you were using?.

What case is it in?.

What case is your grandfather's Freedom Pass in?.

If in identical cases, why?.

They will have been supplied in different cases (to help prevent people "confusing their pass with someone else's Freedom Pass").

DX - Transpires that I did receive an initial letter but there wasn't any law on it. It didn't say on what law they were charging me so my mother replied thinking they were going to have on "boarding a train without a ticket" so she argued that it didn't happen (she's dodgy like that).

Alright Bazza i WILL read the cases if you point me in the right direction

- Just gone back to Oxford Circus and they have a very small sign on the barriers that NO ONE can read if they're in a rush (defo not nan and grandad cos they're half blind anyway) so the sign is completely inadequate.

There's got to be a case about inadequate signage surely ?

As regards my ticket case, we both have the same ones and nans is identical too.

Before I go could someone get back to me about the RI's witness statement because I am sure he should've run it past me to see if I agree and then sign - I don't of course.

Thanks again

DX - Transpires that I did receive an initial letter but there wasn't any law on it. It didn't say on what law they were charging me so my mother replied thinking they were going to have on "boarding a train without a ticket" so she argued that it didn't happen (she's dodgy like that).

 

Alright Bazza i WILL read the cases if you point me in the right direction - Just gone back to Oxford Circus and they have a very small sign on the barriers that NO ONE can read if they're in a rush (defo not nan and grandad cos they're half blind anyway) so the sign is completely inadequate. There's got to be a case about inadequate signage surely ? As regards my ticket case, we both have the same ones and nans is identical too.

 

Before I go could someone get back to me about the RI's witness statement because I am sure he should've run it past me to see if I agree and then sign - I don't of course.

 

Thanks again

"Just gone back to Oxford Circus and they have a very small sign on the barriers that NO ONE can read if they're in a rush (defo not nan and grandad cos they're half blind anyway)"

- Good thing your nan and grandad have their freedom passes then ...... but they aren't being summonsed, you are ......

So, what defence do you think you have?.

You face a choice,

seek an administrative settlement (and adjust your attitude and expectations),

or "have your day in court", which is your right, but may prove more costly....

"Alright Bazza i WILL read the cases if you point me in the right direction" : good for you!. However, I still can't make it worth my time, since you couldn't be bothered initially, and the moment has passed ......

" As regards my ticket case, we both have the same ones and nans is identical too." How come?.

If that is correct, they won't be the original cases

- at least one will have been put in a new case ;

as I mentioned above Freeom passes are supplied in different cases to standard Oysters.. Is your card an Oyster PAYG?.

That isnt relevant to your case if it goes to trial, as it remains 'strict liability', but it would be relevant to persuade TfL not to prosecute, but they've heard all the excuses before... you need to ensure yours rings true.

Hello again.

I think you might be confusing the RI's witness statement with the notes in a little book on the day you were stopped.

Is this possible please?

HB

Been to London today

every station I visited had a massive sign above the barrier and also a small one for every single entrance gate

and it said (more or less):

"Penalty fare or prosecution should you pass this point without a valid ticket, validated electronic card or other authority to travel"

Can't really miss it and the fact that there are barriers makes a reasonable person think that access is restricted, in fact is restricted to passengers with a valid ticket.

Matter of the fact is that you entered a compulsory ticket area without a valid ticket whether you like it or not.

That's a fact and no magistrate will accept your excuses.

£260???... That's the cheapest settlement I read about here on cag.

Personally I would jump at this opportunity to avoid a criminal record and pay up.

I wish they were that lenient when I got caught years ago.

gotta agree...

dx

Having read through this thread, it seems to me that there are a number of areas that you need to think about very carefully before you pursue what you perceive as a either a matter of principle, or an allegation that you have been 'hard done by' for the reason that you give

Court records are littered with examples of those who have ended up with convictions because they have failed to act on good advice, have thought that the Magistrates will share their sense of injustice and have failed to recognise that those same Magistrates can only make their decision based on sound evidence that the law, or Byelaw was broken

From your description, you are a person over 18 years of age and when you were asked to show your ticket, you failed to do so, showing instead a Freedom Pass, which is a concession paid for by public funds and granted for the sole use of the person to whom it is issued. In detecting this, TfL, or a train operator is entitled to consider at least ttwo charges that could be summonsed against you:

i) That you did intend to avoid a fare ( by using someone else's ticket) contrary Section 5.3.a of the Regulation of Railways Act (1889) - relevant Appeal case precedent that a prosecutor is likely to rely on = Browning (1946)

ii) That you failed to purchase a valid ticket before entering a compulsory ticket area contrary to the relevant Byelaw - this is a strict liability matter - The prosecution will show that warning signs were in place, you were not given permission by an authorised person to travel without a valid ticket, you did not hold a valid ticket and you were the person reported. The prosecutor does not need to consider your intention and neither does the Court.

The prosecution department will not discuss the matter with your mother (and neither will the Court) unless she is a qualified lawyer engaged to represent your case. There are serious concerns about impartiality in such circumstances

You have been given a good steer by a number of site members, whether your action was by mistake or by design, you are very fortunate that TfL seem to have decided to deal with this only as a strict liability matter and you say that you have received a SJP notice. The Court will expect you to enter a plea of either 'guilty' or 'not-guilty'.

If you enter a guilty plea, your early acceptance of guilt will be taken into consideration by the Court and you will be given credit for that when they consider any penalty

If you enter a 'not-guilty' plea, the matter will normally be adjourned to a later date to be heard by a full Court sitting and when a trial will take place. If you are then found guilty at trial, the Court may not give any credit when setting the penalty.

The maximum financial penalty for a first offence can be a fine of up to £1000, But the Court will normally set a lower fine.

Making allegations that are not supported by substantive evidence will not help and frequently, may be counter productive

As others have said, I believe that you are best advised to contact the prosecutor's office and see if they are still prepared to accept your immediate payment of a fee to dispose of this matter without SJP / Court action

They do not have to accept this and if the SJP Notice has already been issued, they may not do so. In my opinion it does remain your best option if still available to you

Thank you very much for answering the SOS, OC. Your comments are very informative, as ever.

HB

It seems to me that the op is not prepared to accept an out of court settlement, even if suggested by OC that knows what this is all about.

Hopefully he will let his mum read this thread so a practical decision can be made.

Sometimes everyone has got to accept reality and forget about principles (unfortunately)

Honey bee - Yes I probably am but I thought the notes actually WERE the witness statement? The witness statement is nothing more than a typed up version of our verbal conversation at the station. Wasn't I supposed to be offered to sign his notes or something ? Otherwise he could just write anything he wants AND in fact that is just what he DID do !

Honey bee - Yes I probably am but I thought the notes actually WERE the witness statement? The witness statement is nothing more than a typed up version of our verbal conversation at the station. Wasn't I supposed to be offered to sign his notes or something ? Otherwise he could just write anything he wants AND in fact that is just what he DID do !

I don't claim to be a transport expert, DDI, but Old-CodJA is and he hasn't mentioned it. Have you had time to read what he said last night?

HB